Would implementing Spears on land really be such an issue? — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Would implementing Spears on land really be such an issue?

Arcaedus.7290Arcaedus.7290 Member ✭✭✭✭
edited August 17, 2018 in Guild Wars 2 Discussion

The tl;dr verison: Spears (and other new weapons) could be implemented into the game with a bit of creativity in such a way that wouldn't be resource heavy for the developers and could turn a profit in the long-run.

Many call for "land spears" or even just additional weapons to become a reality, and many more yet vehemently oppose it on the basis of the following arguments:

  1. Who would get the weapons? (a fairness issue)
  2. It might confuse new players who will experience underwater (UW) weapons first and wonder how to get them on land.
  3. It could create balance issues since new skills would have to be created (addressed later on)
  4. It would take a lot of developer resources and time to develop both new skins and new animations (would cost them more money than it would make them)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the meat of the argument against spears is argument #4. Nobody cares for the first three arguments in light of having interesting or cool new content overall and there aren't really any good arguments beyond the fourth one I listed.

If the interest was high enough, I think spears (and other weapons) actually could be introduced in a very economic and eventually lucrative way. Just think about it: currently underwater skins/animations/weapon skills are wasted assets. Nobody plays or enjoys UW content and Anet/the community knows very well that an UW-focused expansion (which is the only way that they could get us to play UW content) would NOT sell well.

Both of these problems could be fixed with a little bit of creativity: An expansion that focuses on the Deep Sea Dragon (aka. Steve). Just to be clear, it would NOT be an UW expansion. It wouldn't be marketed as an UW expansion and it wouldn't play like one either for the most part. The expansion might of course start in water or have some UW content and areas but could use a narrative or plot that focuses more on land.

Here are two examples of what I mean:

  • With the power of another other dead Elder Dragon slain (maybe unintentionally in the next expac or Living World episode), Steve has become enormously powerful. His power allows him to dry up/absorb most if not all of the bodies of water in the game. We then play the majority of the expac on land (in previously oceanic areas) with elite specializations focused on using UW weapons as land weapons.

  • Using his own power, or perhaps utilizing ley energy, Steve creates some anomalous terrain and maps involving strange water physics - think floating bodies of water, and water generally not obeying the laws of physics. This would involve a lot of land-based gameplay and perhaps some transitioning into/out of water. In this case, having elite specializations focused on using UW weapons on land would actually make sense from both a gameplay and narrative perspective.

Some creativity would have to be involved with the harpoon gun and the trident, but it's not outside the realm of possibility. For example, the harpoon gun could have some narrative that involves modifying the weapon to effectively turn it into a bowgun or repeater crossbow, and elite specializations that receive trident skills could focus on throwing the trident (lots of ground-targeted skills) as well as using the 3+ prongs of trident as ways of catching/parrying attacks to heavily differentiate it from both spear and staff.

If you think about it, it's viable as far as argument #4 goes.

  • Recycling UW weapon skins for the land versions shouldn't be too difficult.
  • Animations could also be recycled from UW skills and even borrowing many animations for land versions (just like how revenant staff used many hammer animations).
  • This opens the door to new gem store weapon skins = profit

Would balancing the new weapon skills be an issue? Not if they're attached to an elite spec. New skills must be created for elite specs with each expansion anyway, so having them attached to "new land weapons" in this manner wouldn't be an issue in this case.

I think if player interest was high enough, it's something that could be implemented to the benefit of both Anet and the player base.

Comments

  • JDub.1530JDub.1530 Member ✭✭✭

    I had recently thought making ALL weapons usable underwater (with some skill variants--especially for ground targeted skills--to adapt to the 3D environment), paired with new land-based skills for all UW weapons. This seems to be in the same vein as what you are requesting.

  • Arcaedus.7290Arcaedus.7290 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Oglaf.1074 said:
    New animations as you can’t really use the underwater ones. Effects, too.

    New skills for the same reason as above which means tons of balancing.

    All in all it would be more work than you think.

    New elite specialization skills use new animations anyways. If we're talking specifically the character movement/weapon swings, this is what would be borrowed heavily from UW animations (if possible) and from current land weapons.

    Again, every new batch of elite specializations means new skills for every class. This would be no different, the skills would just be attached to new weapon-types.

    Yes it would be more work than probably any of us thinks, just as new elite specs themselves are a ton of work, but it's an idea worth considering rather than the path we're currently on which will result in scraping the bottom of the barrel and giving classes "whatever is left" as far as elite spec weapons goes (scepter warrior, pistol guardian, hammer necro).

  • Pirindolo.9427Pirindolo.9427 Member ✭✭✭

    Spears = Staves with other skins

  • Joemo.6074Joemo.6074 Member ✭✭

    Are you trying to bring back the Paragon? =)

  • Randulf.7614Randulf.7614 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I'm with the op here. I don't think it is a "big change". Sure it'll require work and time and other resources, but everything including new elites requires work and investment and that shouldn't really stomp on what is otherwise a decent enough idea to add to a spec. We know in theory it is doable since we have seen mesmers use greatswords uniquely, daredevils use staves uniquely and so forth. Anet are talented enough and cleverer enough to make it work - that isn't the issue at all I am sure. It is finding an elite that could utilise it effectively.

    I do think tridents doubling up on land has potential though. Possibly as an ele or mesmer spec, with it transitioning from sea-land seamlessly when the elite is equipped

    What sleep is here? What dreams there are in the unctuous coiling of the snakes mortal shuffling. weapon in my hand. My hand the arcing deathblow at the end of all things. The horror. The horror. I embrace it. . .

  • Arcaedus.7290Arcaedus.7290 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 17, 2018

    @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:
    Of all the weapon/weapon types not used on land, what makes spears the best choice?

    Popular demand. While this is never the sole reason things should be implemented, this game is made for the players so meeting reasonable popular demands is almost always a good move.

    What sort of resources, broadly speaking, would it take to set this up? How are those resources already tasked? How much would this impact ongoing costs, especially how frequently we see balance patches?

    Obviously, I don't have a great idea. I don't think anyone outside of Anet really does. However, anyone who opposes new content in this form based on the argument that it would be too resource heavy on Anet also has just as little of an idea as me as to just how resource heavy implementing these things would be. I'm at least taking what angle I can and making arguments based on currently present evidence that a new weapon type could be economically implemented into the game.

    I just don't see that it would be so much more fun it would be worth the added complication to balancing combat skills/traits, let alone what it would take to implement in the first place.

    Maybe I'll edit my original post but I thought I made it very clear that balance would not be any more of an issue than it would for any other expac:

    Every new batch of elite specs means new weapon skills. --> Does it matter if these new skills are attached to new weapons or not? --> As far as balance goes, absolutely not. The reason the new skills get attached to current weapons (or rather, the current weapon is chosen and new skills are created) is that recycling currently existing animations/skins is more economical than creating an entirely new weapon from scratch.

    My post is made to address exactly this last point here: it could be economically viable (or at least comparable) to have the new skills attached to new weapons since already existing assets can be recycled.

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 17, 2018

    It doesn't really matter. They need to do it. Spears are too iconic a fantasy weapon to not have them available on land, and the skins already exist for God's sake. We need new weapons at this point anyway.

    New animations are a non-issue since those have to be created anyway for new skills gained by new elite specs.

    I actually think Harpoon guns should be converted to Crossbows for land use and Tridents could just be an alternate staff type for casters.

    To be honest, it kind of blows my mind that this hasn't already been done given how limited UW content in the game is.

  • Spears and tridents becoming terrestrial makes more sense than any other brand new weapons being added. There would already have a decent selection of ready-made skins and models made for one thing. They'd just have to make sure that their introduction was sufficiently interesting. Something like 4 classes getting them as new weapons, Gen 2 legendaries being added, and a few flashy new skins for each. A couple of "regional" skins for the new expansion, fill in a few gaps in existing sets (Dwarven spear?), a few GW1 skins for nostalgia's sake and make sure they're in the new black lion weapon set. They don't need to go back and fill in all the gaps in existing weapon sets. The roller beetle has set that precedent.

  • Amaranthe.3578Amaranthe.3578 Member ✭✭✭

    I think spears on land is out of the question.
    Just consider for a moment the things they have dismissed in the past cuz its "too much work".

  • Overlord RainyDay.2084Overlord RainyDay.2084 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 17, 2018

    Consider how many of those "too much work" things have actually made it into the game. It's certainly less work than mounts.

    I'm not saying we absolutely mush have polearms, but it's likely lower hanging fruit than other new features they could implement. Maybe they'll save spears for Cantha so we can go full dynasty warriors.

  • starhunter.6015starhunter.6015 Member ✭✭✭

    OP your post is good except for this part "Nobody plays or enjoys UW content and Anet/the community knows very well that an UW-focused expansion (which is the only way that they could get us to play UW content) would NOT sell well." that is a broad false statement as for one I play and enjoy UW content and combat. Sure the combat needs improved for sure. I would love to see the skins/weapons for tridents and spears be used on a land based weapon (Land Spear/Pole arm).

  • Arcaedus.7290Arcaedus.7290 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Amaranthe.3578 said:
    I think spears on land is out of the question.
    Just consider for a moment the things they have dismissed in the past cuz its "too much work".

    This suggestion isn't just something they would whimsically introduce though. This is a suggestion for how they could introduce spears, or other new weapons in regards to an expansion/elite specialization weapons. A lot of work goes into this process and taking already existing weapon models, and reusing certain animations while creating unique others + effects isn't beyond the scope of what they did for HoT and PoF. I think it's more of a matter of whether or not the narrative they build goes in the direction of the Deep Sea Dragon or underwater/aquatic territories. If it does, I don't at all think that underwater weapons on land is unreasonable.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 17, 2018

    Other than all the work that is required, I don't think it would be. But let's be clear ... being alot of work is a reason not to do it. I see almost no return on the investment to create spears as land weapons other than the proven route of elite spec weapons released with expansions.

    As a Dev, I would still FORCE a player to have a separate 'land' and 'water' spear equipped though.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • Gehenna.3625Gehenna.3625 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 17, 2018

    @starhunter.6015 said:
    OP your post is good except for this part "Nobody plays or enjoys UW content and Anet/the community knows very well that an UW-focused expansion (which is the only way that they could get us to play UW content) would NOT sell well." that is a broad false statement as for one I play and enjoy UW content and combat. Sure the combat needs improved for sure. I would love to see the skins/weapons for tridents and spears be used on a land based weapon (Land Spear/Pole arm).

    If you take his "nobody" literally then yes, he is incorrect. But from experience, I can tell you that when people say "nobody" they mean "not many people". It's very annoying but there it is.

    The point that you enjoy UW content does disprove him in the literal sense, but I do not think you represent a large group of players just dying to go under water. So from the general point that it's not going to sell well, hey may very well be right.

    I can see a LS chapter that goes to some under water city working out, but not an entire expansion. Maybe, just maybe, if an under water LS is done so well it gets people excited about UW content, then that might be considered, but I'm not holding my breath.

    "In my experience, if you can't say what you mean, you can never mean what you say. The details are everything." ~ Minister Durano

  • Arcaedus.7290Arcaedus.7290 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Other than all the work that is required, I don't think it would be. But let's be clear ... being alot of work is a reason not to do it. I see almost no return on the investment to create spears as land weapons other than the proven route of elite spec weapons released with expansions.

    As a Dev, I would still FORCE a player to have a separate 'land' and 'water' spear equipped though.

    It is certainly a lot of work, but keep in mind that designing new elite specs and new weapons for them is a lot of work. Relative to the status quo, would a suggestion like mine be THAT much more work? I seem to not think so which is why the idea is worth putting out there. Perhaps it will pique the interest of a dev, and they can internally evaluate this possibility or something similar!

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 18, 2018

    @Arcaedus.7290 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Other than all the work that is required, I don't think it would be. But let's be clear ... being alot of work is a reason not to do it. I see almost no return on the investment to create spears as land weapons other than the proven route of elite spec weapons released with expansions.

    As a Dev, I would still FORCE a player to have a separate 'land' and 'water' spear equipped though.

    It is certainly a lot of work, but keep in mind that designing new elite specs and new weapons for them is a lot of work. Relative to the status quo, would a suggestion like mine be THAT much more work? I seem to not think so which is why the idea is worth putting out there. Perhaps it will pique the interest of a dev, and they can internally evaluate this possibility or something similar!

    Let me rephrase:

    It's not alot of work in the context of the possibility of putting a land spear as a weapon in the next expansion. It is alot of work just to slide it in as a patch or LS.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • Amaranthe.3578Amaranthe.3578 Member ✭✭✭

    @Arcaedus.7290 said:

    @Amaranthe.3578 said:
    I think spears on land is out of the question.
    Just consider for a moment the things they have dismissed in the past cuz its "too much work".

    This suggestion isn't just something they would whimsically introduce though. This is a suggestion for how they could introduce spears, or other new weapons in regards to an expansion/elite specialization weapons. A lot of work goes into this process and taking already existing weapon models, and reusing certain animations while creating unique others + effects isn't beyond the scope of what they did for HoT and PoF. I think it's more of a matter of whether or not the narrative they build goes in the direction of the Deep Sea Dragon or underwater/aquatic territories. If it does, I don't at all think that underwater weapons on land is unreasonable.

    We will not get any new weapon and there is no real need for them.
    First of all mechanically you can take any weapon and do with it what you will regardless of theme of the weapon, e.g :revs hammer is a long ranger weapon that feels like a staff.
    If in some distant a future we will have loads of e-specs and we wont have enough weapons they will just start to double up on existing the weapons(for example a spellbreakers dagger is different than a bandits dagger or whatevr).
    Since adding a new weapon is a lot of work and serves no real mechanical purpose it will not happen.

  • Adding spears has almost no return on investment opportunities. In fact it would cost anet alot more, not just the initial cost, but the ongoing support for spears in each new weapon skin set that is released.

    The only reason they would add spears, when they wont make anet money is if they are really stuck for a new key selling point for an expansion. Considering there are way more desired features that could act as a key selling point (underwater maps, tengu race ect) its unlikely spears will come for many years yet, if ever.

  • Pirindolo.9427Pirindolo.9427 Member ✭✭✭

    We already have land spear. Its name is "Staff"

  • Jojo.6140Jojo.6140 Member ✭✭✭

    Dont care about spears so much, but i would love to see tridents as terrestrial weapons for mesmers with some kind of illusionary water-magic.

  • Zaklex.6308Zaklex.6308 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Well. with the recent update to UW combat I think you can expect the expansion that brings the DSD into play will contain a fair, no, make that quite a bit of UW content, I would say it would lean heavily on UW and above water content for that matter...maybe with a smattering of Southsun Cove like settings for the land portion. Or, they could just never do anything related to the DSD and not have make all that UW content...which is not as bad as most people make it out to be, if people would bother to use spatial awareness, the same method you use to orient yourself in unfamiliar territory in the real world.

    Yes...no...maybe...what do you want, can't you see I'm busy saving the world...AGAIN!

  • Edelweiss.4261Edelweiss.4261 Member ✭✭✭

    I think new weapons would be such a significant boon to the game that the cost to implement would be worth it. New weapons could, in theory, break some of the implicit rules of other weapons. Image wielding a scythe as an anti-group weapon. Most weapons limit cleave to a few targets, but let the scythe hit more targets at a lower damage rate. Let spears serve as anti-armor weapons that focuses around unblockable attacks. Have great axes deal additional damage based on ally-applied conditions. There's so much you can do with new weapons that can be spread across multiple classes! New weapons can be game-changing.

  • zealex.9410zealex.9410 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Oglaf.1074 said:
    New animations as you can’t really use the underwater ones. Effects, too.

    New skills for the same reason as above which means tons of balancing.

    All in all it would be more work than you think.

    Arent they adding new skills with every elite spec? Also mounts were alot of work too and they basically carried the expac sales on their own. I think something as requested as new weapons will do the same, regardless of work.

  • Oglaf.1074Oglaf.1074 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @zealex.9410 said:

    @Oglaf.1074 said:
    New animations as you can’t really use the underwater ones. Effects, too.

    New skills for the same reason as above which means tons of balancing.

    All in all it would be more work than you think.

    Arent they adding new skills with every elite spec? Also mounts were alot of work too and they basically carried the expac sales on their own. I think something as requested as new weapons will do the same, regardless of work.

    The thing is of course “effort vs profit”. The Elite specializations were a huge selling point of the two expansions so it was worth it for Anet to do so.

    Going through the same process in turning underwater weapons into land weapons “just because they can” of course wouldn’t be.

    Please Anet give us a hide Chest Armour-option. Tattoo-clad Norns everywhere beg of you.

  • zealex.9410zealex.9410 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 19, 2018

    @Oglaf.1074 said:

    @zealex.9410 said:

    @Oglaf.1074 said:
    New animations as you can’t really use the underwater ones. Effects, too.

    New skills for the same reason as above which means tons of balancing.

    All in all it would be more work than you think.

    Arent they adding new skills with every elite spec? Also mounts were alot of work too and they basically carried the expac sales on their own. I think something as requested as new weapons will do the same, regardless of work.

    The thing is of course “effort vs profit”. The Elite specializations were a huge selling point of the two expansions so it was worth it for Anet to do so.

    Going through the same process in turning underwater weapons into land weapons “just because they can” of course wouldn’t be.

    And why couldnt that arguement work for anything else they've done? Mounts, elite specs etc. "They did it just because they can" and it was succesful.

    In the same sense the next elite specs using new weapons would be a success. An even bigger one than normal elite specs since new weapons have been up there with mounts for top requested things.

  • @Edelweiss.4261 said:
    I think new weapons would be such a significant boon to the game that the cost to implement would be worth it. New weapons could, in theory, break some of the implicit rules of other weapons. Image wielding a scythe as an anti-group weapon. Most weapons limit cleave to a few targets, but let the scythe hit more targets at a lower damage rate. Let spears serve as anti-armor weapons that focuses around unblockable attacks. Have great axes deal additional damage based on ally-applied conditions. There's so much you can do with new weapons that can be spread across multiple classes! New weapons can be game-changing.

    So can already existing weapons adjusted to a new elite spec. So far noone has given any compelling reason why adding a new weapon would be cost effective for anet to make. New weapons cost ALOT in terms of ongoing support in new skin sets and likely have a very high implementation cost (despite what OP seems to think). If they can get the same sales from just reusing existing weapons in expansion why on earth would they add a whole new weapon.

    As I said before, the only reason to add a complicated and potentially non profitable system to the game would be as a key selling point for an expansion. And they already have other features that are much more requested.

  • @zealex.9410 said:

    @Oglaf.1074 said:

    @zealex.9410 said:

    @Oglaf.1074 said:
    New animations as you can’t really use the underwater ones. Effects, too.

    New skills for the same reason as above which means tons of balancing.

    All in all it would be more work than you think.

    Arent they adding new skills with every elite spec? Also mounts were alot of work too and they basically carried the expac sales on their own. I think something as requested as new weapons will do the same, regardless of work.

    The thing is of course “effort vs profit”. The Elite specializations were a huge selling point of the two expansions so it was worth it for Anet to do so.

    Going through the same process in turning underwater weapons into land weapons “just because they can” of course wouldn’t be.

    And why couldnt that arguement work for anything else they've done? Mounts, elite specs etc. "They did it just because they can" and it was succesful.

    In the same sense the next elite specs using new weapons would be a success. An even bigger one than normal elite specs since new weapons have been up there with mounts for top requested things.

    They added mounts as a key sellling point of the new expansion. They were added to generate hype and boost sales, not just 'because they can'. They also had a long term unique monetization model in mount skins. Land spears have no long term monetization. Most people already find elite specs reusing existing weapons enough to be worth buying an expansion for.

    Why then would they add a key selling point that has little ROI, when they could instead invest in things like underwater combat, which is not only much more highly requested but has much greater potential to generate revenue for Anet.

  • Arcaedus.7290Arcaedus.7290 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:
    So can already existing weapons adjusted to a new elite spec. So far noone has given any compelling reason why adding a new weapon would be cost effective for anet to make.

    Alright, well so far no one has given any compelling reason why adding a new weapon would not be cost effective for them. Those who are criticizing this post are relying on the same technique that I relied on for making this post: logical extrapolation based on observations of already existing content. Unless you have experience in game design and net code, you probably don't know any more than I do about resource cost here.

    New weapons cost ALOT in terms of ongoing support in new skin sets and likely have a very high implementation cost (despite what OP seems to think).

    I would agree with this statement. Picture this for a moment though: before PoF, a warrior with a dagger did not at all exist. To implement daggers into the warrior class through an elite specialization no doubt costed them a lot. It was essentially creating something for warrior that did not exist before. They then did the same thing 8 more times for the other classes. And there you have exactly what I'm arguing may be possible with spears/tridents/harpoon guns in a future expac.

    If they can get the same sales from just reusing existing weapons in expansion why on earth would they add a whole new weapon.

    I mean, they would be reusing existing weapons with spears/tridents/harpoon guns. Maybe the level of recycling I'm suggesting actually is NOT possible, but that's something for Anet to evaluate. Have they have evaluated this before and decided against it? Possibly. But did they do so in this context? Possibly not. I did some searches on the forums here and on the GW2 reddit before realizing that no one has really proposed something quite like this.

    As I said before, the only reason to add a complicated and potentially non profitable system to the game would be as a key selling point for an expansion. And they already have other features that are much more requested.

    This is exactly why they haven't added new weapons into the game so far. Gliders/horizontal character progression (HoT) and Mounts (PoF) were both HUGE on their priority lists. I know I'm saying this in hindsight but this was pretty obvious before the release of either expacs since as you said, it's easy to see how these things are both massively appealing to almost all of the player base, AND recurrently monetizable.

    I think this post's suggestion fits the bill on both of these points though. Never mind the costs for a second (I mean it's not your job to worry about these), and just think: do you want new weapons? Who doesn't? New weapon skins are also recurrently monetizable. In both points, the magnitude is far lower than it was for either gliders or mounts but still positive.

  • phs.6089phs.6089 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Won't hurt if new elits got couple of new weapons. Problems might be in classifying aqua weapons into land ones from programming perspectives but again i don't have the code

    "There is always a lighthouse, there's always a man, there's always a city."

  • Arcaedus.7290Arcaedus.7290 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @phs.6089 said:
    Won't hurt if new elits got couple of new weapons. Problems might be in classifying aqua weapons into land ones from programming perspectives but again i don't have the code

    Good point. The code for this is likely very old at this point and dev's have mentioned in AMAs and other threads (just from memory) that the code is so convoluted that some seemingly simple things are currently impossible in the game right now. I don't know what the situation is on UW weapons but have yet to hear any direct word on the idea of spears or any new weapons in the game. I like to think that as far as the game's combat goes, the coding is at least manageable since it's one of the biggest selling points of the game overall, so it's a possibility? :D (pls don't kill the dream Anet devs!)

  • @Arcaedus.7290 said:

    Alright, well so far no one has given any compelling reason why adding a new weapon would not be cost effective for them. Those who are criticizing this post are relying on the same technique that I relied on for making this post: logical extrapolation based on observations of already existing content. Unless you have experience in game design and net code, you probably don't know any more than I do about resource cost here.

    Opportunity cost is a thing in business. For every decision you choose to pursue, u take away resources from other potential invenstments. You will have to pay people to basically rewrite the game code to allow an underwater weapon to be equipped on land. Then you have to code the wardrobe to allow spears as a new weapon. Considering anet have told us wardrobe is already extremely limited and thats why we dont see every single possible outfit or skin there is, I imagine this would be costly to do. I dont think thats an unreasonable assumption. Then there is the cost of animating all these weapons. Much higher than adding a dagger to warrior, as dagger auto animations already exist. Spear has no animations workable on land to go off.

    Furthermore, you have to support this new feature by adding skins. At least 10-20 skins to make it an acceptable choice of weapon. Considering we get an average of 3 sets on skins PER EXPANSION, for free. Its very unlikely anet is going to want to create all these skins, when again, they can just add an existing weapon to a class and not have to worry about skins for it. ON top of that, every time they add a new skin set to the game, they are going to have to create an additional spear skin, adding tons of recurring costs. The only possible monetization is unique skins in the gem store. But theres only sp many anet can release before gem store becomes oversaturated with skins and players become unhappy.

    I mean, they would be reusing existing weapons with spears/tridents/harpoon guns. Maybe the level of recycling I'm suggesting actually is NOT possible, but that's something for Anet to evaluate. Have they have evaluated this before and decided against it? Possibly. But did they do so in this context? Possibly not. I did some searches on the forums here and on the GW2 reddit before realizing that no one has really proposed something quite like this.

    You said it yourself, recycling these weapons isnt possible because they use animaitons designed for a 3D plane. This would NOT work at all on land and all animations would have to be redone from scratch, right down to simply holding the weapons.

    This is exactly why they haven't added new weapons into the game so far. Gliders/horizontal character progression (HoT) and Mounts (PoF) were both HUGE on their priority lists. I know I'm saying this in hindsight but this was pretty obvious before the release of either expacs since as you said, it's easy to see how these things are both massively appealing to almost all of the player base, AND recurrently monetizable.

    Yes mounts and gliders are monetizeble, spears arent because are limited to fitting in with the current framework other weapons use and therefore wont generate more revenue.

    I think this post's suggestion fits the bill on both of these points though. Never mind the costs for a second (I mean it's not your job to worry about these), and just think: do you want new weapons? Who doesn't? New weapon skins are also recurrently monetizable. In both points, the magnitude is far lower than it was for either gliders or mounts but still positive.

    I dont really care if we get spears or not. Id rather develeopment goes towards other things personally but thats irrelevent. If you are going to suggest a feature, and even go as far as suggesting it wont be much work to create that feature, you need more of an argument that 'i want it. it will be good for the game'. If you want anet to seriously consider putting spears in the game you need to suggest how it will be profitable for them to do so. And right now I still dont see an argument on why they would be.

  • Arcaedus.7290Arcaedus.7290 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 19, 2018

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:

    Opportunity cost is a thing in business. For every decision you choose to pursue, u take away resources from other potential invenstments. You will have to pay people to basically rewrite the game code to allow an underwater weapon to be equipped on land.

    We don't really know how difficult or costly reworking that code may be though. I could also make these same arguments to favor skipping out on many of the features you want to see in the game as well (support for dungeon content, individual outfit pieces, more narrative focus on other races besides human).

    Then there is the cost of animating all these weapons. Much higher than adding a dagger to warrior, as dagger auto animations already exist. Spear has no animations workable on land to go off.

    This I disagree on. Look at revenant and daredevil staff. There was previously no precedent for staff being used as a melee weapon. They borrowed animations from hammer to get the job done meanwhile creating a few unique ones as well. As far as the melee attacks go (thrusts, strikes, blocking, holding/idling with spear) there is plenty of precedent. Thrown attacks even have a precedent (DH's Spear of Justice/f1 virtue).

    Furthermore, you have to support this new feature by adding skins. At least 10-20 skins to make it an acceptable choice of weapon. Considering we get an average of 3 sets on skins PER EXPANSION, for free. Its very unlikely anet is going to want to create all these skins, when again, they can just add an existing weapon to a class and not have to worry about skins for it.

    They actually used to make skins for the underwater weapons, and stopped since 1. they began to neglect underwater content and 2. it probably wasn't making them money. It's possible that 2 is the cause of 1, but either way, if the narrative they're trying to tell took a turn towards the Deep Sea Dragon or an expac with Underwater content, I think my proposition is a reasonable one.

    Yes mounts and gliders are monetizeble, spears arent because are limited to fitting in with the current framework other weapons use and therefore wont generate more revenue.

    They have the potential to generate more revenue through gemstore skin sales like I argued. Nobody really knows for sure. Neither you nor I are in a position to do the opportunity cost calculations on it though.

    I dont really care if we get spears or not. Id rather develeopment goes towards other things personally but thats irrelevent. If you are going to suggest a feature, and even go as far as suggesting it wont be much work to create that feature, you need more of an argument that 'i want it. it will be good for the game'. If you want anet to seriously consider putting spears in the game you need to suggest how it will be profitable for them to do so. And right now I still dont see an argument on why they would be.

    With each batch of elite specs, they already put a lot of work into coding a new weapon for each class. I'm inquiring about just how much more work it would comparatively be if they decided that the new weapon to be coded for each class be ones that already exist in the game's code (albeit in underwater content currently). I did suggest how I think it might be profitable for them to do so with what limited knowledge I have. It's no Gliders or Mounts, but it's something.

    One last thing. This may be a little bit ad hominem but I think it's relevant: This issue is just as desired by some players, as your preferences are desired by you. People appreciate and want different things from this game, so it's okay for them to voice their opinions on what they want in the future. I don't think it's productive for players to put down other players' suggestions based solely on arguments of perceived costs to Anet, since it's not their (your) job to evaluate this. If you like this suggestion, say so, if you don't care, which seems to be the case, it's okay to just ignore the post. This is not going to be the case where this suggestion just suddenly catches fire, and Anet feels forced into implementing it into the game (at enormous costs to themselves) due solely to popular demand. I don't even think we have precedent for anything like that.

  • @Arcaedus.7290 said:

    They have the potential to generate more revenue through gemstore skin sales like I argued. Nobody really knows for sure. Neither you nor I are in a position to do the opportunity cost calculations on it though.

    Again I already said they will struggle to generate revenue through the gem store as new weapons will have to fit into the current framework current weapons use. AKA sold though blc tickets. This is only going to add more work for anet creating a 19th weapon to every future set. Considering people already buy plenty of blc, I doubt the inclusion of an RNG spear skin into an already large pool of weps will greatly increase sales. They can sell individual skins but again like I said they can only add so many before customers start to complain as their weapon choice isnt prioritized for unique skins and we have 20 spear skins in gemstore.

    One last thing. This may be a little bit ad hominem but I think it's relevant: This issue is just as desired by some players, as your preferences are desired by you. People appreciate and want different things from this game, so it's okay for them to voice their opinions on what they want in the future. I don't think it's productive for players to put down other players' suggestions based solely on arguments of perceived costs to Anet, since it's not their (your) job to evaluate this. If you like this suggestion, say so, if you don't care, which seems to be the case, it's okay to just ignore the post. This is not going to be the case where this suggestion just suddenly catches fire, and Anet feels forced into implementing it into the game (at enormous costs to themselves) due solely to popular demand. I don't even think we have precedent for anything like that.

    I never said people cant voice their opinions. I have every right to put down a suggestion if its framed as a serious request as an addition the game, just as you have the right to suggest it and it IS reasonable put it down on the basis of cost. Cost is the number one issue affecting implementation of features after all. If you want your suggestion to have even the slightest chance of being added, you need to prove to anet this is going to make them money. And lots of it. I will not simply ignore a suggestion just because I dont think its reasonable, otherwise the topic becomes a pointless echo chamber with non of the issues ever being addressed.

    Also I understand the things I want in the game will never made it to release because of money concerns, thats why I only post them in wishlist threads, not actual suggestions.

  • Arcaedus.7290Arcaedus.7290 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:

    If you want your suggestion to have even the slightest chance of being added, you need to prove to anet this is going to make them money. And lots of it. I will not simply ignore a suggestion just because I dont think its reasonable, otherwise the topic becomes a pointless echo chamber with non of the issues ever being addressed.

    Also I understand the things I want in the game will never made it to release because of money concerns, thats why I only post them in wishlist threads, not actual suggestions.

    Your first sentence has truth to it from Anet's point of view but I don't necessarily think that's a hard and fast rule. Long before PoF and even before HoT, players had been suggesting mounts. Not once did I ever see someone proposing a cost-benefit analysis of mounts. The closest thing I saw was a very simple piece of logic, along the lines of "if you introduce mounts into the game, future game mechanics could be centered around them, plus you could make gemstore mount skins." I saw this argument many times. It was essentially just stating the obvious. It's not like players who made or agreed with these suggestions really knew the resource cost behind mounts or just how lucrative they could be... they just wanted mounts because it just seemed right for the game/they'd be cool, or what have you.

    Honestly, I see anything that players propose as a wishlist thread. There isn't a formal proposal process because we don't have access to the information we would need to convince Anet whether something would definitely make them money. This one is essentially that and with an argument for how spears/new weapons could be implemented into the game if Anet was so inclined. It's plainly obvious that they want to put them in game (concept art for various maps) but it's also obvious it would be too resource heavy to just flat out implement them into the game as a standalone update (otherwise they would have done so already). In my opinion, if the game's narrative ever heads in that direction, it's worth considering some novelty as far as underwater weapons go.

  • Edelweiss.4261Edelweiss.4261 Member ✭✭✭

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:
    So can already existing weapons adjusted to a new elite spec. So far noone has given any compelling reason why adding a new weapon would be cost effective for anet to make. New weapons cost ALOT in terms of ongoing support in new skin sets and likely have a very high implementation cost (despite what OP seems to think). If they can get the same sales from just reusing existing weapons in expansion why on earth would they add a whole new weapon.

    I'm not arguing that it is cost-effective. There's no way it could be. I'm saying that it should be done despite that.

    Adjusting existing weapons for new classes doesn't change the content that already exists. Rather, adding new elite specializations will have diminishing returns as elite specs are mutually exclusive. Why choose a new elite spec when I like how the old one plays? People may find they like some of the new ones, but, with each round of elite specs, more people will not feel that new elite specs aren't worth the cost of an expansion. Adding new weapons to interact with old content. This does assume that there will be more than one more expansion.

    As for other expansion-selling features, none are coming to mind. Underwater revamp? I'm not sure fixing that is even possible. Player housing? I wouldn't pay $1 for. I'd probably skip that expansion like I originally did with HoT. New race? Gigantic resource dump for virtually nothing. New mounts? What can they add to make my current mounts obsolete? All the next expansion will add is more of the same. That's fine if it goes for like $20, but, for the full price, I need something new. What great ideas can you think of?

  • Eddbopkins.2630Eddbopkins.2630 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 20, 2018

    The only reason id want new weapons is you get new weapon skills, new play styles. Gw1 had such an assortment of skills that build diversity was so outrageous and overwhealming that it created a plethra of viable options.
    Now that in gw2 skills are tied to weapons it lowers the diversity and play style that can happen with each build. I was always against skills being tied to weapons from day 1 but it is what it is.
    In terms of diversity and build options gw2 is a step backwards compaired to gw1 i feel.

  • Oglaf.1074Oglaf.1074 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Eddbopkins.2630 said:
    The only reason id want new weapons is you get new weapon skills, new play styles. Gw1 had such an assortment of skills that build diversity was so outrageous and overwhealming that it created a plethra of viable options.
    Now that in gw2 skills are tied to weapons it lowers the diversity and play style that can happen with each build. I was always against skills being tied to weapons from day 1 but it is what it is.
    In terms of diversity and build options gw2 is a step backwards compaired to gw1 i feel.

    While I agree with you about it being limited, in all fairness only half your skills are tied to your weapon. Unless you’re a Revenant, you can freely choose the other half... with some limitations.

    Limitations that kinda blow, though.

    I’d love to be able to play without an Elite skill in favour of an additional regular Utility skill in it’s place... :confounded:

    Please Anet give us a hide Chest Armour-option. Tattoo-clad Norns everywhere beg of you.

  • I don't understand this communities rational, when people say "Arenanet should not waste their time on X content because it would be to much work". Arenanet is a Video-game development COMPANY, I don't know if people have forgotten but it is their job to deliver content the player base wants. This was the same argument people gave with Mounts,Raids,Classes etc. It's not your job to worry about whether or not Arenanet can afford it. Arenanet has been around long enough to figure out whether or not content is worthy of release.

    If an overwhelming majority of the community wants "X" content (Realistic goal/content), and Arenanet is unable to provide then they have failed their customer base.

  • Trise.2865Trise.2865 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Martin The Brave.8731 said:
    I don't understand this communities rational, when people say "Arenanet should not waste their time on X content because it would be to much work". Arenanet is a Video-game development COMPANY, I don't know if people have forgotten but it is their job to deliver content the player base wants. This was the same argument people gave with Mounts,Raids,Classes etc. It's not your job to worry about whether or not Arenanet can afford it. Arenanet has been around long enough to figure out whether or not content is worthy of release.

    If an overwhelming majority of the community wants "X" content (Realistic goal/content), and Arenanet is unable to provide then they have failed their customer base.

    It is our job, as the customer base, to provide this company ArenaNet with accurate information on how we wish to be served. It is OUR task to communicate what the "overwhelming majority" actually wants, and not just some vocal minorities (who have already kittened up the game in the ways you've mentioned, and more). The way to do that is by detailing projects and content that we would choose to see before a proposed feature, and suggest they prioritize allocation of resources in that direction to please the greater majority. It has nothing to do with what they can or can't afford, but more what we as a community deem more important. It's no different than what the OP is trying to do.

    If we want ANet to step up their game, then we must step up ours.

  • Arcaedus.7290Arcaedus.7290 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Trise.2865 said:

    It is our job, as the customer base, to provide this company ArenaNet with accurate information on how we wish to be served. It is OUR task to communicate what the "overwhelming majority" actually wants, and not just some vocal minorities (who have already kittened up the game in the ways you've mentioned, and more). The way to do that is by detailing projects and content that we would choose to see before a proposed feature, and suggest they prioritize allocation of resources in that direction to please the greater majority. It has nothing to do with what they can or can't afford, but more what we as a community deem more important. It's no different than what the OP is trying to do.

    Its arrogant to think that a majority or even a plurality of the community's suggestions about Anet's resource allocations actually sways their decision-making process. The main influence we have is being vocal enough about wanting something (whether it's reasonable or not) and if they hear enough yays, the next step is evaluating if it can be feasibly implemented into the game. I agree with Martin on this one; it's Anet who determines whether or not the request is reasonable, not us.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Trise.2865 said:

    @Martin The Brave.8731 said:
    I don't understand this communities rational, when people say "Arenanet should not waste their time on X content because it would be to much work". Arenanet is a Video-game development COMPANY, I don't know if people have forgotten but it is their job to deliver content the player base wants. This was the same argument people gave with Mounts,Raids,Classes etc. It's not your job to worry about whether or not Arenanet can afford it. Arenanet has been around long enough to figure out whether or not content is worthy of release.

    If an overwhelming majority of the community wants "X" content (Realistic goal/content), and Arenanet is unable to provide then they have failed their customer base.

    It is our job, as the customer base, to provide this company ArenaNet with accurate information on how we wish to be served. It is OUR task to communicate what the "overwhelming majority" actually wants, and not just some vocal minorities (who have already kittened up the game in the ways you've mentioned, and more).

    Exactly, if you dig up that old poll which must exist where 90% of the community voted no for "do you like wearing pants?" this will back up that they truly listen.

    Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
    No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.

  • zealex.9410zealex.9410 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:

    @zealex.9410 said:

    @Oglaf.1074 said:

    @zealex.9410 said:

    @Oglaf.1074 said:
    New animations as you can’t really use the underwater ones. Effects, too.

    New skills for the same reason as above which means tons of balancing.

    All in all it would be more work than you think.

    Arent they adding new skills with every elite spec? Also mounts were alot of work too and they basically carried the expac sales on their own. I think something as requested as new weapons will do the same, regardless of work.

    The thing is of course “effort vs profit”. The Elite specializations were a huge selling point of the two expansions so it was worth it for Anet to do so.

    Going through the same process in turning underwater weapons into land weapons “just because they can” of course wouldn’t be.

    And why couldnt that arguement work for anything else they've done? Mounts, elite specs etc. "They did it just because they can" and it was succesful.

    In the same sense the next elite specs using new weapons would be a success. An even bigger one than normal elite specs since new weapons have been up there with mounts for top requested things.

    They added mounts as a key sellling point of the new expansion. They were added to generate hype and boost sales, not just 'because they can'. They also had a long term unique monetization model in mount skins. Land spears have no long term monetization. Most people already find elite specs reusing existing weapons enough to be worth buying an expansion for.

    Why then would they add a key selling point that has little ROI, when they could instead invest in things like underwater combat, which is not only much more highly requested but has much greater potential to generate revenue for Anet.

    Land spear or any weapon has plenty of opportunity to be monetised through gemstore and blacklion skins. They havent done spear skins for a while they easily have room and themes to make spears from.

    But again why someone just like mounts that has been requested for year wont work? Esp when mounts had a number of very vocal ppl being against them with a passion.

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.