(video) Build templates, and why the design is horrible in it's current state. - Page 3 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

(video) Build templates, and why the design is horrible in it's current state.

13

Comments

  • Seera.5916Seera.5916 Member ✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Seera.5916 said:

    @Patty.3268 said:

    @Taygus.4571 said:
    That punishes hardcore players and loyal spenders even more....are you crazy?

    If anything buying more should get cheaper.

    No, I'm not. If slots start out more expensive and become cheaper the more you buy, that instead punishes non-hardcore players who only need a few additional slots instead of large numbers. There are a lot more non-hardcore players than hardcore players and loyal spenders. I was looking at it taking all types of players into account, not just some. I agree that my approach would make templates more expensive for hardcore players, but would also increase availability of additional slots for the overall player base by having lower entry prizes.

    Then it should be the first one is at a reduced charge (aka entry fee), then any additional are the original charge. So first for 100, then the remaining are 200. Not this 100(x+1) where x is the number of slots you've purchased.

    What they should do is discount bulk purchases.

    You mean something like getting a whole bunch for free for instance? Done.

    Since when are 2 equipment tabs, 3 build template slots, and 3 build storage slots a bunch? Even if you throw in the 3 build storage templates being offered for free, that's still not a bunch. And just the 3 build storage templates being offered in the store for free is a not a bunch on its own either.

    A bunch would be the build templates and the equipment tabs set to max for say up to 3 characters and the build template storage at max for free That's a bunch for free. AKA 9 build templates, 12 equipment tabs, and 21 build storage slots. That's a bunch.

    What I said was they should offer the first one at a discount and any further at the regular price. Whether they put that discount at free or 50% or whatever.

    Offering the first one cheaper makes it easier for people to buy the first one. Once they've bought one, it gets easier to buy more, even if the price is higher. Because they've seen the benefit they gained from having another one. On a permanent basis

    And I haven't heard them doing that. Just a temporary one on just the build template storage slots. And to me, that comes off as they know the limits are set too low so they're offering that one pack to attempt to appease us and make them think they're being nice.

    Unless you can link to people where ANet says we're going to get a bunch for free. I'm sure everyone would actually like that. Means they've listened to feedback and have altered their plans to make more people happy.

    So please, don't put words in my mouth. I'm very literal. I say what I mean.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 9, 2019

    @Seera.5916 said:
    Since when are 2 equipment tabs, 3 build template slots, and 3 build storage slots a bunch? Even if you throw in the 3 build storage templates being offered for free, that's still not a bunch.

    From what I have seen, we are getting some as part of the core game, just like every other quantity-based feature they sell in the GS. That's not a bunch to you? Sounds like something you should get over. No reasonable person is going to argue what 'a bunch' means.

    You think Anet should offer volume pricing/etc? ... you, me and everyone should already have a really high certainty of how these things are going to be priced ... just like every other quantity-based feature in the GS. If you think of things Anet should do ... and you know they aren't ... you're expectations aren't realistic. In the last 7 years, have you ever seen Anet offer volume-pricing or discounting for bank slots, inventory slots, character slots, shared bags, etc .... ? I haven't. I wouldn't expect such a thing for this feature or any other.

    My advice is that you watch for sales on the GS, because we know Anet has them. Get your 'volume-discount' then.

    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/

  • Ashantara.8731Ashantara.8731 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 9, 2019

    @YMIHere.9580 said:
    What happens to your off hand axe when you swap to a greatsword?

    The same thing that happens to it when I double-click it in my inventory. I have an extremely well sorted inventory regarding my equipable items. Everything has its prelocated slot, for each two-handed weapon I always leave a free slot next to it so that I can easily swap it for two other weapons. It's really simple to manage and causes no hassle whatsoever.

  • Seera.5916Seera.5916 Member ✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Seera.5916 said:
    Since when are 2 equipment tabs, 3 build template slots, and 3 build storage slots a bunch? Even if you throw in the 3 build storage templates being offered for free, that's still not a bunch.

    From what I have seen, we are getting some as part of the core game, just like every other quantity-based feature they sell in the GS. That's not a bunch to you? Sounds like something you should get over. No reasonable person is going to argue what 'a bunch' means.

    You think Anet should offer volume pricing/etc? ... you, me and everyone should already have a really high certainty of how these things are going to be priced ... just like every other quantity-based feature in the GS. If you think of things Anet should do ... and you know they aren't ... you're expectations aren't realistic. In the last 7 years, have you ever seen Anet offer volume-pricing or discounting for bank slots, inventory slots, character slots, shared bags, etc .... ? I haven't. I wouldn't expect such a thing for this feature or any other.

    My advice is that you watch for sales on the GS, because we know Anet has them. Get your 'volume-discount' then.

    So which is it: are they giving us a bunch or are they giving us some? Because now, you've said both. No reasonable person will say that a bunch is the same quantity as some. Except for bananas.

    So just because I have feeling that ANet's not going to do something means I just be quiet and not give my opinion on the matter? Already fully aware of just how likely ANet is to do what I'm suggesting. If you noticed, I said ANet should. Not that ANet will likely.

    Again, please don't put words in my mouth. I've not stated my expectations so please don't assume what they are. But here they are so that you can stop putting words into my mouth. My expectations are that the equipment tabs will be priced like bag and bank slots - which is what they've said. I have no clue nor expectation on what the price will be for the build templates or the build template storage slots, but I expect a forum outcry unless they are dirt cheap or free, even if the price is reasonable. My expectations are also that I will likely never buy a single equipment tab since they are character specific and will likely be priced like bag slots. I haven't purchased any bag slots, not even on sale. Only have a few because they came in bundles with other things I wanted that made the cost more inline with I think they are worth. Not that I've used them. I don't know which character to put them on. I don't farm, can't stand the monotony, so I don't run into inventory issues often enough on any character. For the build templates and the build template storage slots I have no expectations on if I will buy more than the free build template storage slot pack that ANet will be offering for free when the templates are released. Will likely depend on cost and how many you get per pack.

    I don't overhype things or draw unrealistic expectations on things when there's precedent for what to expect. I look for posts and comments that give me the facts on what an expansion, release, patch, etc will have. Not the posts that look like it's just a hype thread. I thoroughly believe that satisfaction in something is when you're expectations are met or exceeded for that something. I don't tend to watch trailers or other such promotional material as they only really serve to hype up something rather than state what features are coming or what the gist of the premise of the story is for that content. For most games I expect to get what I am told is going to be in something, that there will be glitches, and that most of the glitches will get fixed at some point, but not necessarily quickly. The games not covered by this expectation are those made by EA.

  • Seera.5916Seera.5916 Member ✭✭✭

    @Nick.5276 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Seera.5916 said:
    Since when are 2 equipment tabs, 3 build template slots, and 3 build storage slots a bunch? Even if you throw in the 3 build storage templates being offered for free, that's still not a bunch.

    From what I have seen, we are getting some as part of the core game, just like every other quantity-based feature they sell in the GS. That's not a bunch to you? Sounds like something you should get over. No reasonable person is going to argue what 'a bunch' means.

    You think Anet should offer volume pricing/etc? ... you, me and everyone should already have a really high certainty of how these things are going to be priced ... just like every other quantity-based feature in the GS. If you think of things Anet should do ... and you know they aren't ... you're expectations aren't realistic. In the last 7 years, have you ever seen Anet offer volume-pricing or discounting for bank slots, inventory slots, character slots, shared bags, etc .... ? I haven't. I wouldn't expect such a thing for this feature or any other.

    My advice is that you watch for sales on the GS, because we know Anet has them. Get your 'volume-discount' then.

    I do believe that any, as you say, reasonable person would say that after 7(!) years, for Anet to release an inferior build/gear swapping system to something a gamer did for free and charge for it, is unreasonable. For them to offer far less flexibility and not make it free is unreasonable. For them to expect players to pay for it with their time to make it even a pale shadow of the free version, is unreasonable. To remove the option of using ArcDPS and taking all the risks associated with it into their own hands sounds like monopolising to monetise for the sake of it.

    I wasn't expecting it to be completely free, at least not anything that would free up actual inventory. But the quantities given for free are lower than what the average person that build templates are the most useful for use. I'm not saying that the people who have 20+ builds needed to be able to put all of their builds in for free. But more than the 2 complete builds we're currently set to be given for free (how many builds use the same equipment?). Complete build = traits, skills, and equipment.

    I think people may not have been at least not as angry if the build templates and storage were just set to maximum and were free, but the equipment tabs cost some money. Or an upfront cost to unlock it all account wide with maxed out build templates and build template storage slots and 3 equipment tabs (1 for each mode or 1 for WvW, open world, and raid/fractal) and then pay for additional equipment tabs.

  • @Ashantara.8731 said:

    @YMIHere.9580 said:
    What happens to your off hand axe when you swap to a greatsword?

    The same thing that happens to it when I double-click it in my inventory. I have an extremely well sorted inventory regarding my equipable items. Everything has its prelocated slot, for each two-handed weapon I always leave a free slot next to it so that I can easily swap it for two other weapons. It's really simple to manage and causes no hassle whatsoever.

    I do this as well, I just do it all manually so I don't screw myself over on edge cases after relying on presets to do it mostly automatically. It would have been nice if they could have just made invisible bags grab bound items, but with some loot and (perhaps more importantly) bound crafting materials that would require some serious adjustments.

  • @Ashantara.8731 said:

    You should take your own advice more seriously. ;) Even though GW2 cannot use the exact same build template system GW1 used, due to a different skill system, the main point the video creator made was: GW1 was saving builds locally, which meant an unlimited amount of saved builds and no additional server involvement. This is exactly what ArcDPS does, too.

    ANet could have created the same system for GW2, but they decided against it, mainly for the money, thereby complicating things a lot by saving builds to their servers (with limited database entries, hence limiting the amount of template slots) and having gear saved in a new "armory" database table on the servers as well instead of leaving it in a character's inventory table and simply swapping the items.

    I stand by what I said. He is talking about how Build Templates work but he is explaining it wrong. That is not how they work.

  • @Wakani.1829 said:
    why don't you humor us all, by ejucating us on what he got wrong then? - otherwise what you just said, is nothing more than white-knighting for Arenanet in yet another massive blunder on their part.

    Regardless of how you look at it, when you compare what ArcDPS templates can currently do, and has been able to do for years now - to ArenaNet's Long under way templates, it's night and day, and not in favor of the ArenaNet version.

    I believe the word that you were looking for is "educating" j/s

    I am not going to get into a peeing contest with you when it is quite obvious that you are one of the people that just enjoys complaining like a spoiled child when things don't go exactly the way that they think they should. I, for one, am quite happy with the way that the new Templates work. Of course part of the reason that I am happy with them is, possibly, because I watched the entire video where they explained them, and answered questions about them, so I actually have a clue how they work.

  • @Agrotera.1254 said:

    I believe the word that you were looking for is "educating" j/s

    Im not from the US or the UK, But thank you for proving my point by instantly resorting to a personal attack rather than pointing out how im wrong and you're right.

    P.s. you still haven't pointed that out, we're all eagerly awaiting your wisdom smart guy.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 9, 2019

    @Astralporing.1957 said:
    So, we should expect Anet to kitten us over, and be content with it?

    Of course not ... you just vote with your wallet. Telling Anet how you want something they are going to sell doesn't make much sense if we already have high certainty how it will be sold to us. This feature is not different than other quantity-based features ... so you can be assured that it will be offered to us in the same way as other quantity-based features as well. Maybe you think that's getting screwed over ... that's just an unreasonable expectation because it's not based on what is evident from the reality and history of this game.

    I do remember them giving us wardrobe for free. I do remember not having to buy wardrobe slots piece by piece, but getting everything at once. For free. Although you're right - if that QoL update went today, i would expect them to heavily monetize it. I wouldn't be glad about it, i would call them out for it, and i definitely wouldn't be saying that nothing changed in their business model in the last 7 years however. It has changed. And not for the better.

    Like I said before, sure we get a few things for free once in a while ... that's exceptional. it's not that Anet has changed ... it's that getting free stuff is so exceptional, it's equivalent to noise as a measure of change. Anet has always sold quantity-based features to players .. .there IS no change.

    Here is my guess ... we get 'some' (for my buddy who wants to argue if some = a bunch) inline with what they told us we would get and we can buy eaches for around 1200-1400 gems.

    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/

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 9, 2019

    @Seera.5916 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Seera.5916 said:
    Since when are 2 equipment tabs, 3 build template slots, and 3 build storage slots a bunch? Even if you throw in the 3 build storage templates being offered for free, that's still not a bunch.

    From what I have seen, we are getting some as part of the core game, just like every other quantity-based feature they sell in the GS. That's not a bunch to you? Sounds like something you should get over. No reasonable person is going to argue what 'a bunch' means.

    You think Anet should offer volume pricing/etc? ... you, me and everyone should already have a really high certainty of how these things are going to be priced ... just like every other quantity-based feature in the GS. If you think of things Anet should do ... and you know they aren't ... you're expectations aren't realistic. In the last 7 years, have you ever seen Anet offer volume-pricing or discounting for bank slots, inventory slots, character slots, shared bags, etc .... ? I haven't. I wouldn't expect such a thing for this feature or any other.

    My advice is that you watch for sales on the GS, because we know Anet has them. Get your 'volume-discount' then.

    So which is it: are they giving us a bunch or are they giving us some?

    six of one, half a dozen of the other

    ... or maybe you prefer the term 'a few'? how about 'multitude'? maybe 'quantity'? 'infinitude' is cool, but I can already tell you wouldn't like it.

    You let me know how I should choose my words so we can get past your pedantic hangup.

    In the mean time, your issue over words doesn't change the point I was making. I'm not expecting you to like or not like whatever Anet does or react ... or not ... to it. What I do expect is that we have some reasonable approach to using information, evidence, observations that we already have or can make to come to some reasonable expectation of what we will likely see. Nothing I have seen in this game suggests anything BUT the standard approach that Anet has always used to offer quantity-based items to players in the GS. If that's not your expectation, then you must love being disappointed.

    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/

  • Ashantara.8731Ashantara.8731 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 10, 2019

    @Wakani.1829 said:

    @Agrotera.1254 said:
    I believe the word that you were looking for is "educating" j/s

    Im not from the US or the UK, But thank you for proving my point by instantly resorting to a personal attack rather than pointing out how im wrong and you're right.

    You have to admit that mistyping "educating" while talking about education is extremely funny. ;)

    All fun aside, they did say in their stream that further updates would follow up later, like how legendary gear is being dealt with, so there is hope for improvement. Which, of course, still doesn't solve nonsense like having build storage on the server instead of being able to save an unlimited amount of templates locally, or why equipment information cannot be saved along with it. Regardless of where a template is being stored, you would still program routines that check whether all information saved in the template agrees with your current inventory, so there is no excuse other than making more money out of it to store templates on the server.

  • Ototo.3214Ototo.3214 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 10, 2019

    I saw people arguing that Anet has never done bulk pricing which...if I'm understanding correctly, that statement is wrong. They do have some things in the gemstore that have a cheaper unit price if you buy the bigger quantities, including things like shared inventory slots. So it's very possible we might get prices for these templates that are also cheaper if bought in bulk. And I'd be all for that being the case.

  • IndigoSundown.5419IndigoSundown.5419 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:
    So, we should expect Anet to kitten us over, and be content with it?

    Of course not ... you just vote with your wallet.

    "Voting with your wallet" doesn't work unless you also tell the company why you are not spending. Are you not buying X because you don't want it, because you think it's too pricey, because you have an ideological beef against the pricing structure? Of course, individual complaints are not going to have much impact, but if there are enough of them, and if sales are lower than ANet expects, then the company may have an idea why you're "voting."

    If you were around back then, you might remember the beef by "veteran players" against ANet's business policy with HoT purchase, specifically the lack of a free character slot. A lot of people said similar things. ANet later decided to offer a free character slot for "veteran players" (i.e., those who purchased core earlier) with pre-purchase of HoT. Had people not made those complaints, ANet would have had no way to know if people were not buying HoT because of the slot, or other reasons (one that came up a lot was the "low" amount of content. Another was the inclusion of core with HoT for new adopters).

    Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. -- Santayana

  • Some People are happy to play with no sub
    And then complain that they have put something desirable in a shop to tempt us to buy - how exactly do you want anet to pay for dev costs and invest in the game? And on top of that you can get them for free as well by converting from gold!

    "Any path that narrows future possibilities may become a lethal trap. Humans do not thread their way through a maze; they scan a vast horizon filled with unique opportunities." - The Spacing Guild Handbook.

    Beware the meta!

  • Ashantara.8731Ashantara.8731 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @vesica tempestas.1563 said:
    And then complain that they have put something desirable in a shop to tempt us to buy - how exactly do you want anet to pay for dev costs and invest in the game? And on top of that you can get them for free as well by converting from gold!

    "I'm rich, you know." ;)

    @Ototo.3214 said:
    So it's very possible we might get prices for these templates that are also cheaper if bought in bulk. And I'd be all for that being the case.

    Actually, you're right. Let's wait and see what we are going to get on release day and how much it is going to cost if we need to expand. Things might change within the next three weeks.

  • Vinceman.4572Vinceman.4572 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @vesica tempestas.1563 said:
    Some People are happy to play with no sub
    And then complain that they have put something desirable in a shop to tempt us to buy - how exactly do you want anet to pay for dev costs and invest in the game? And on top of that you can get them for free as well by converting from gold!

    So, you know those are the same people? Ah, my bad, you don't.

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 10, 2019

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:
    So, we should expect Anet to kitten us over, and be content with it?

    Of course not ... you just vote with your wallet.

    "Voting with your wallet" doesn't work unless you also tell the company why you are not spending.

    Agreed ... and if you want Anet to take you seriously, you complain when you've tried the product, not seen a few videos about it before it's even released. EXACTLY like how you're example of the free character slot for HOT went down.

    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/

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 10, 2019

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:
    So, we should expect Anet to kitten us over, and be content with it?

    Of course not ... you just vote with your wallet.

    "Voting with your wallet" doesn't work unless you also tell the company why you are not spending.

    Agreed ... and if you want Anet to take you seriously, you complain when you've tried the product, not seen a few videos about it before it's even released. EXACTLY like how you're example of the free character slot for HOT went down.

    ...you do realize that the whole slot debacle with HoT took place (and got partially addressed) months before launch?

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • vesica tempestas.1563vesica tempestas.1563 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 10, 2019

    @Vinceman.4572 said:

    @vesica tempestas.1563 said:
    Some People are happy to play with no sub
    And then complain that they have put something desirable in a shop to tempt us to buy - how exactly do you want anet to pay for dev costs and invest in the game? And on top of that you can get them for free as well by converting from gold!

    So, you know those are the same people? Ah, my bad, you don't.

    Lol well we can assume most people are happy to play with no sub.. So ye 'your bad'

    "Any path that narrows future possibilities may become a lethal trap. Humans do not thread their way through a maze; they scan a vast horizon filled with unique opportunities." - The Spacing Guild Handbook.

    Beware the meta!

  • Vinceman.4572Vinceman.4572 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @vesica tempestas.1563 said:

    @Vinceman.4572 said:

    @vesica tempestas.1563 said:
    Some People are happy to play with no sub
    And then complain that they have put something desirable in a shop to tempt us to buy - how exactly do you want anet to pay for dev costs and invest in the game? And on top of that you can get them for free as well by converting from gold!

    So, you know those are the same people? Ah, my bad, you don't.

    Lol well we can assume most people are happy to play with no sub.. So ye 'your bad'

    I haven't said that with my statement.

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 10, 2019

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:
    So, we should expect Anet to kitten us over, and be content with it?

    Of course not ... you just vote with your wallet.

    "Voting with your wallet" doesn't work unless you also tell the company why you are not spending.

    Agreed ... and if you want Anet to take you seriously, you complain when you've tried the product, not seen a few videos about it before it's even released. EXACTLY like how you're example of the free character slot for HOT went down.

    ...you do realize that the whole slot debacle with HoT took place (and got partially addressed) months before launch?

    Yes I remember that part. I mean, that doesn't change my message. The bottomline is that if you don't like the feature, don't buy it. If you don't like the game, stop playing. Complaining that Anet isn't going to sell something the way you want it makes no sense, especially if there is already an established approach to how they have sold every other feature like this one. That HoT example is not the same as what is happening here ... this isn't new ... features like this have been here and sold in this manner since the beginning of the game. The whole reason this uproar for this feature is dishonest is because there wasn't any problem with this approach in the past for these features. No one had unreasonable expectations that quantity-based features aren't purchased per use. All the sudden, that's a big problem. That makes no sense.

    It's just people being dishonest because they were not paying for a similar 3rd party feature. I don't really get the approach ... do you think people are that dense? They can't see that difference? Do you think that makes you credible?

    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/

  • perilisk.1874perilisk.1874 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @vesica tempestas.1563 said:
    Some People are happy to play with no sub
    And then complain that they have put something desirable in a shop to tempt us to buy - how exactly do you want anet to pay for dev costs and invest in the game? And on top of that you can get them for free as well by converting from gold!

    Regular expansions, with the cash shop only as supplemental income?

  • Vinceman.4572Vinceman.4572 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:
    So, we should expect Anet to kitten us over, and be content with it?

    Of course not ... you just vote with your wallet.

    "Voting with your wallet" doesn't work unless you also tell the company why you are not spending.

    Agreed ... and if you want Anet to take you seriously, you complain when you've tried the product, not seen a few videos about it before it's even released. EXACTLY like how you're example of the free character slot for HOT went down.

    ...you do realize that the whole slot debacle with HoT took place (and got partially addressed) months before launch?

    Yes I remember that part. I mean, that doesn't change my message. The bottomline is that if you don't like the feature, don't buy it. If you don't like the game, stop playing. Complaining that Anet isn't going to sell something the way you want it makes no sense, especially if there is already an established approach to how they have sold every other feature like this one. That HoT example is not the same as what is happening here ... this isn't new ... features like this have been here and sold in this manner since the beginning of the game. The whole reason this uproar for this feature is dishonest is because there wasn't any problem with this approach in the past for these features. No one had unreasonable expectations that quantity-based features aren't purchased per use. All the sudden, that's a big problem. That makes no sense.

    It's just people being dishonest because they were not paying for a similar 3rd party feature. I don't really get the approach ... do you think people are that dense? They can't see that difference? Do you think that makes you credible?

    What you are not seeing is that the 3rd party program is heavily superior to the one of Arenanet. If we take the monetization aspect aside for just a second ArcDPS in its function is still better than the GW2 template system.
    People already wrote it here and in other threads + reddit that they would easily pay for the convenience of the Arc feature but integrated in the game engine. I would easily buy it as well if it facilitates adjustments etc. But their implementation is so terrible it has no meaningful advantage to those who were using templates before and would do after. The people who didn't care before (and didn't use Arc) won't suddenly benefit that much.
    If they are successful with that system, fine but from an objective business perspective I really can't see that they will make big moneys from that. The system is just too cra_py for being a moneymaker.

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @perilisk.1874 said:

    @vesica tempestas.1563 said:
    Some People are happy to play with no sub
    And then complain that they have put something desirable in a shop to tempt us to buy - how exactly do you want anet to pay for dev costs and invest in the game? And on top of that you can get them for free as well by converting from gold!

    Regular expansions, with the cash shop only as supplemental income?

    This is the whole problem. It is NOT up to us to decide how we are willing to pay for things offered in this game; you can't run a sustainable business like that. If the old way is being abandoned, there is a reason for that to happen, and it's a business reason. These are not player-based decisions and it's completely unreasonable to expect that to change.

    The worst part here is that this argument you make isn't even about this feature .. it's rooted in wanting expansions. Even if you did get this feature for free, the conclusion isn't we are getting expansions coming back. These associations are nonsense.

    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/

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Vinceman.4572 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:
    So, we should expect Anet to kitten us over, and be content with it?

    Of course not ... you just vote with your wallet.

    "Voting with your wallet" doesn't work unless you also tell the company why you are not spending.

    Agreed ... and if you want Anet to take you seriously, you complain when you've tried the product, not seen a few videos about it before it's even released. EXACTLY like how you're example of the free character slot for HOT went down.

    ...you do realize that the whole slot debacle with HoT took place (and got partially addressed) months before launch?

    Yes I remember that part. I mean, that doesn't change my message. The bottomline is that if you don't like the feature, don't buy it. If you don't like the game, stop playing. Complaining that Anet isn't going to sell something the way you want it makes no sense, especially if there is already an established approach to how they have sold every other feature like this one. That HoT example is not the same as what is happening here ... this isn't new ... features like this have been here and sold in this manner since the beginning of the game. The whole reason this uproar for this feature is dishonest is because there wasn't any problem with this approach in the past for these features. No one had unreasonable expectations that quantity-based features aren't purchased per use. All the sudden, that's a big problem. That makes no sense.

    It's just people being dishonest because they were not paying for a similar 3rd party feature. I don't really get the approach ... do you think people are that dense? They can't see that difference? Do you think that makes you credible?

    What you are not seeing is that the 3rd party program is heavily superior to the one of Arenanet.

    Maybe. I won't know until I've tried it

    But that's a moot point anyways because Anet is a business that is providing a paid feature within the context of the game.

    The other guy wasn't. The comparison is not honest.

    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/

  • Vinceman.4572Vinceman.4572 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Maybe. I won't know until I've tried it

    Then you haven't watched their stream which is a pity because then you'll realize - and every intelligent human being will - that their system is not well-thought. The splitting into three different parts is not due to qol for the players. It's the monetization aspect only which is understandable from the business point but not for the greater good of the game.

    But that's a moot point anyways because Anet is a business that is providing a paid feature within the context of the game.

    This argument never gets old. Of course they are a business but everyone of us has their own opinion and can measure for himself if this decision is a good one or not. I won't convince you that I found it terrible and you won't convince me. The market will tell but since we're lacking an expansion that peaked revenues in the past, observed the layoffs, encountered the Deroir & JP debacle, had a disappointing LS announcement + MO leaving the company I doubt that there will be nice numbers in the next months. Where should they come from? That's a serious question for me. There's no indication for a stable evolution of income for Arenanet.

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vinceman.4572 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Maybe. I won't know until I've tried it

    Then you haven't watched their stream which is a pity because then you'll realize - and every intelligent human being will - that their system is not well-thought. The splitting into three different parts is not due to qol for the players. It's the monetization aspect only which is understandable from the business point but not for the greater good of the game.

    But that's a moot point anyways because Anet is a business that is providing a paid feature within the context of the game.

    This argument never gets old. Of course they are a business but everyone of us has their own opinion and can measure for himself if this decision is a good one or not. I won't convince you that I found it terrible and you won't convince me. The market will tell but since we're lacking an expansion that peaked revenues in the past, observed the layoffs, encountered the Deroir & JP debacle, had a disappointing LS announcement + MO leaving the company I doubt that there will be nice numbers in the next months. Where should they come from? That's a serious question for me.

    I don't need to watch a stream. Like any rational person, I will wait to actually experience it before I complain. If you guys think that complaining about paying for features is an approach to justifying Anet committing to expansion based content, it's not. If they are moving away from that expansion model, it's not because they don't like making money. It's not because they like having angry players.

    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/

  • Calistin.6210Calistin.6210 Member ✭✭✭

    I am sorry but arcpdps was done by, one guy I think, and it did pretty much what everyone wanted and he did this for free out of the goodness of his heart and didn't go bankrupt doing so yet Anet a company behind a whole mmo could not add this in update free to everyone as a basic QoL update becuase they would go belly up, lose their home and end up in the street?

    Yeah no. lol

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Calistin.6210 said:
    I am sorry but arcpdps was done by, one guy I think, and it did pretty much what everyone wanted and he did this for free out of the goodness of his heart and didn't go bankrupt doing so yet Anet a company behind a whole mmo could not add this in update free to everyone as a basic QoL update becuase they would go belly up, lose their home and end up in the street?

    Yeah no. lol

    No one is saying Anet is going to 'end up on the street'. The point is that Anet is a business and the other guy wasn't. To compare what he was doing to what Anet is doing doesn't make sense.

    If you don't like the price, you don't have to buy it. If you don't like the feature, you don't have to buy it. But don't sit there and complain when Anet comes and maintains their sovereignty over their game and their right to benefit from that. If you don't see how that's important, you just need to get wise. That's a very important business concept. The only thing did wrong here was that they allowed this fellow (as good as his intentions were) to encroach on that space that Anet owns for as long as they did. The irony is that they did it for the benefit of the players ... the same ungrateful ones that who are now entitled to get the same standard of service they were getting from the other guy. Dream on.

    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/

  • Vinceman.4572Vinceman.4572 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    I don't need to watch a stream. Like any rational person, I will wait to actually experience it before I complain.

    Of course you don't need to watch it. It was just an offer by them and you could have seen the feature live + asking questions. Actually there will be no difference between the experience ingame and the whole handling you could see in the stream. That's all.
    Inb4: If you haven't used Arc templates before the templates could be a benefit for you but if you have used it before it's utterly trash.

    If you guys think that complaining about paying for features is an approach to justifying Anet committing to expansion based content, it's not. If they are moving away from that expansion model, it's not because they don't like making money. It's not because they like having angry players.

    They are moving away from the expansion model because it's cheaper. Just ask the next game developer of your trust. One was already here in a thread like this defending Anet as well (DeltaEagle was his nick name or so).
    And even if you can't believe it I'm fine with their model as long as we get proper content with it. But that's highly debatable since both expansions - HoT more than PoF - offered more content than the throw-away stuff we got with every LS episode.
    That's the fun part on your side of defending Arenanet you don't accept that I and others would pay for good, replayable content. From what I see lately: Episodes offering 1 week of interest at most, it's more 1-2 days, raids are in maintenance mode (I could imagine they've already abandoned them internally), fractals treated stepmotherly (100 including CM was the last interesting and well-designed fractal), PvP suffering for years & WvW the same. On the other hand we have objectively more grindy achievements + nice gem store stuff. But hey, maybe that'll work out well. We will see.

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • Seera.5916Seera.5916 Member ✭✭✭

    @Vinceman.4572 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Maybe. I won't know until I've tried it

    Then you haven't watched their stream which is a pity because then you'll realize - and every intelligent human being will - that their system is not well-thought. The splitting into three different parts is not due to qol for the players. It's the monetization aspect only which is understandable from the business point but not for the greater good of the game.

    But that's a moot point anyways because Anet is a business that is providing a paid feature within the context of the game.

    This argument never gets old. Of course they are a business but everyone of us has their own opinion and can measure for himself if this decision is a good one or not. I won't convince you that I found it terrible and you won't convince me. The market will tell but since we're lacking an expansion that peaked revenues in the past, observed the layoffs, encountered the Deroir & JP debacle, had a disappointing LS announcement + MO leaving the company I doubt that there will be nice numbers in the next months. Where should they come from? That's a serious question for me. There's no indication for a stable evolution of income for Arenanet.

    I don't think it was due to the monetization. It was done to keep the spots where you set the build up in the same place.

    I thought the system was well thought out. I don't know how much I will use it or how easy it is to swap builds out between template storage and the build template slots, especially if you have more than the max number of them.

    I'd imagine those that have a large number of unique builds on a single character (like 20+) or a large number of characters with more than 2-3 builds per character is likely a minority of players who would use the system in the first place. So while I do feel for those who did fully utilize arc's templates to the fullest extent and now have a problem, I don't think ANet needs to drastically change anything.

    They should give a 3rd equipment tab for free as very few builds share the same equipment set up.

    I do hope that the build templates are relatively cheap as they won't sell many otherwise since those are done via chat codes. I'd max out on equipment tabs likely well before I would buy another build template slot or storage - beyond any offered for free.

    I'm also like Obtena and I watched the stream. I don't judge something until I can actually play with it. Especially if the explicitly state in the stream that things can change. I can get a feel for if I think I will or will not like something, but I can't be sure until I've actually played with it.

    I don't judge the prices because we don't know specifics. Only a possible method to base it on, but nothing in the gem store is really like that. Nothing holds 60 items max (including duplicates) but can only hold one helm at a time max. So it's hard to say how that would be priced even knowing what bag and bank slots are. But I can see how people are getting the estimates that they are and agreeing that those estimates make this new system fairly cost prohibitive for people who like to have one character fulfill multiple roles.

  • Vinceman.4572Vinceman.4572 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Calistin.6210 said:
    I am sorry but arcpdps was done by, one guy I think, and it did pretty much what everyone wanted and he did this for free out of the goodness of his heart and didn't go bankrupt doing so yet Anet a company behind a whole mmo could not add this in update free to everyone as a basic QoL update becuase they would go belly up, lose their home and end up in the street?

    Yeah no. lol

    No one is saying Anet is going to 'end up on the street'. The point is that Anet is a business and the other guy wasn't. To compare what he was doing to what Anet is doing doesn't make sense.

    If you don't like the price, you don't have to buy it. If you don't like the feature, you don't have to buy it. But don't sit there and complain when Anet comes and maintains their sovereignty over their game and their right to benefit from that. If you don't see how that's important, you just need to get wise. That's a very important business concept. The only thing did wrong here was that they allowed this fellow (as good as his intentions were) to encroach on that space that Anet owns for as long as they did. The irony is that they did it for the benefit of the players ... the same ungrateful ones that who are now entitled to get the same standard of service they were getting from the other guy. Dream on.

    Or they could have bought deltaconnected's knowledge transform it into the game as a better implementation and being open with the fact that they need to impose money for it due to having a running business.
    I mean they didn't even announce an official price because it 1x1 of marketing to evaluate how much you can milk your customer. It's not about making money to ensure running it's making big money to satisfy shareholders.

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Vinceman.4572 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    I don't need to watch a stream. Like any rational person, I will wait to actually experience it before I complain.

    Of course you don't need to watch it. It was just an offer by them and you could have seen the feature live + asking questions. Actually there will be no difference between the experience ingame and the whole handling you could see in the stream. That's all.
    Inb4: If you haven't used Arc templates before the templates could be a benefit for you but if you have used it before it's utterly trash.

    I will reserve my judgement when the feature is ingame. As always, there is enough time for things to change ... and they do. And yes I tried Arc templates. The integration wtih the game was annoying and clunky IMO ... so I'm all open to whatever Anet can provide.

    If you guys think that complaining about paying for features is an approach to justifying Anet committing to expansion based content, it's not. If they are moving away from that expansion model, it's not because they don't like making money. It's not because they like having angry players.

    They are moving away from the expansion model because it's cheaper.

    Right ... that's a business decision, yet the way you guys are talking, you would think this game is a charity. If you understand this is a business, it's irrelevant what you decide what you would be willing to pay for. The value to anyone that plays MMO's is massive for the number of hours of enteratianment you get.

    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/

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Vinceman.4572 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Calistin.6210 said:
    I am sorry but arcpdps was done by, one guy I think, and it did pretty much what everyone wanted and he did this for free out of the goodness of his heart and didn't go bankrupt doing so yet Anet a company behind a whole mmo could not add this in update free to everyone as a basic QoL update becuase they would go belly up, lose their home and end up in the street?

    Yeah no. lol

    No one is saying Anet is going to 'end up on the street'. The point is that Anet is a business and the other guy wasn't. To compare what he was doing to what Anet is doing doesn't make sense.

    If you don't like the price, you don't have to buy it. If you don't like the feature, you don't have to buy it. But don't sit there and complain when Anet comes and maintains their sovereignty over their game and their right to benefit from that. If you don't see how that's important, you just need to get wise. That's a very important business concept. The only thing did wrong here was that they allowed this fellow (as good as his intentions were) to encroach on that space that Anet owns for as long as they did. The irony is that they did it for the benefit of the players ... the same ungrateful ones that who are now entitled to get the same standard of service they were getting from the other guy. Dream on.

    Or they could have bought deltaconnected's knowledge transform it into the game as a better implementation and being open with the fact that they need to impose money for it due to having a running business.
    I mean they didn't even announce an official price because it 1x1 of marketing to evaluate how much you can milk your customer. It's not about making money to ensure running it's making big money to satify shareholders.

    I'm not going to pretend I understand why they did or didn't do something like that. I have a feeling, having worked in this area, there are some legalities that Anet may not want to deal with to do that.

    And yes, I don't disagree with you at all ... A business IS all about satisfying stakeholders. If you really and truly understand that, then this shouldn't be that big a problem to you because it's due to that relationship we get to play this game in the first place. That's the worst thing about these threads. There is mutually desirable benefits for Anet to making this game and for us to play it. People make threads like these pretending Anet has some parasitic relationship with it's customers. How dishonest can people be?

    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/

  • Vinceman.4572Vinceman.4572 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Seera.5916 said:
    I don't think it was due to the monetization. It was done to keep the spots where you set the build up in the same place.

    I thought the system was well thought out. I don't know how much I will use it or how easy it is to swap builds out between template storage and the build template slots, especially if you have more than the max number of them.

    It is for monetization. The system way too complex as it should have been. I mean you just need to look at GW1 or at ArcDPS from the functional perspective and I clearly distinguish from engine things it's just about the function and how their system is working.

    I'd imagine those that have a large number of unique builds on a single character (like 20+) or a large number of characters with more than 2-3 builds per character is likely a minority of players who would use the system in the first place. So while I do feel for those who did fully utilize arc's templates to the fullest extent and now have a problem, I don't think ANet needs to drastically change anything.

    Exactly, the system primary is for players that used build templates before, players that wished the feature from GW1, players that know integrated templates from other MMOs and of course some others. The "others" - that have never claimed templates before will probably have a benefit but not the rest which is a clear indication for a bad implementation functional wise.

    They should give a 3rd equipment tab for free as very few builds share the same equipment set up.

    That won't change things at all. Seriously, I don't want 1-xx slots for free. I want a good system and I would have paid for it.

    I do hope that the build templates are relatively cheap as they won't sell many otherwise since those are done via chat codes. I'd max out on equipment tabs likely well before I would buy another build template slot or storage - beyond any offered for free.

    According to them it'll be in the same range like bag slots etc. which makes sense.

    I'm also like Obtena and I watched the stream. I don't judge something until I can actually play with it. Especially if the explicitly state in the stream that things can change. I can get a feel for if I think I will or will not like something, but I can't be sure until I've actually played with it.

    They worked 2 years on it and you think they can change the core within 3 weeks. Well, yeah, enough for that...

    I don't judge the prices because we don't know specifics. Only a possible method to base it on, but nothing in the gem store is really like that. Nothing holds 60 items max (including duplicates) but can only hold one helm at a time max. So it's hard to say how that would be priced even knowing what bag and bank slots are. But I can see how people are getting the estimates that they are and agreeing that those estimates make this new system fairly cost prohibitive for people who like to have one character fulfill multiple roles.

    See above.

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • Vinceman.4572Vinceman.4572 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    I will reserve my judgement when the feature is ingame. As always, there is enough time for things to change ... and they do. And yes I tried Arc templates. The integration wtih the game was annoying and clunky IMO ... so I'm all open to whatever Anet can provide.

    Clunky? You had to press 3 keys at once to open the tool and then you could do everything you wanted. Compared to the ingame feature that's 2 buttons at the same time more.

    Right ... that's a business decision, yet the way you guys are talking, you would think this game is a charity. If you understand this is a business, it's irrelevant what you decide what you would be willing to pay for. The value to anyone that plays MMO's is massive for the number of hours of enteratianment you get.

    Nobody has ever said that he or she will have things for free. Do you even read the posts? People will pay for expansions, people support subscription fees. Heck people would even pay for the function of ArcDPS.
    You still don't understand. Their feature is inferior to ArcDPS and that won't change within 3 weeks. That's what you have to realize in the first place and once the price is known we can go on discussing.
    Of course I had a massive amount of entertainment and if I think their strategy is right I will pay for more and if I'm not it's completely ok to use their forums to show my discontent. We have the same rights you have and again: I would pay for good implementations and good content as I have in the past.

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    I'm not going to pretend I understand why they did or didn't do something like that. I have a feeling, having worked in this area, there are some legalities that Anet may not want to deal with to do that.

    And yes, I don't disagree with you at all ... A business IS all about satisfying stakeholders. If you really and truly understand that, then this shouldn't be that big a problem to you because it's due to that relationship we get to play this game in the first place. That's the worst thing about these threads. There is mutually desirable benefits for Anet to making this game and for us to play it. People make threads like these pretending Anet has some parasitic relationship with it's customers. How dishonest can people be?

    You know about the difference of a shareholder and a stakeholder, right?
    You and me are stakeholder because we have an interest in the company or in this case in their product. A shareholder is someone who has a stock - in this case NCSoft is meant as a company in the Korea Exchange - equivalent of the New York Stock Exchange at Wall Street. (Personally I don't own stocks from NCSoft)
    There's a difference in satisfying stakeholders and satisfying shareholders and in my view and of others we've seen an increase of imbalance between those interests starting with the layoffs in spring. NCSoft is not making money to run a usual business they need to grow otherwise the stock market will punish them and that affected and will affect Arenanet in the future. The game devs can be enthusiastic as they want, the hunt is on and trying to make money with a tool that is inferior to a tool from a single developer, had to be developed for 2 years (which is a joke) and then promoted like this is clearly one of the best indicators for the bleeding cow that has to be milked - 1x1 business economics.

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • Acheron.4731Acheron.4731 Member ✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Vinceman.4572 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Maybe. I won't know until I've tried it

    Then you haven't watched their stream which is a pity because then you'll realize - and every intelligent human being will - that their system is not well-thought. The splitting into three different parts is not due to qol for the players. It's the monetization aspect only which is understandable from the business point but not for the greater good of the game.

    But that's a moot point anyways because Anet is a business that is providing a paid feature within the context of the game.

    This argument never gets old. Of course they are a business but everyone of us has their own opinion and can measure for himself if this decision is a good one or not. I won't convince you that I found it terrible and you won't convince me. The market will tell but since we're lacking an expansion that peaked revenues in the past, observed the layoffs, encountered the Deroir & JP debacle, had a disappointing LS announcement + MO leaving the company I doubt that there will be nice numbers in the next months. Where should they come from? That's a serious question for me.

    I don't need to watch a stream. Like any rational person, I will wait to actually experience it before I complain. If you guys think that complaining about paying for features is an approach to justifying Anet committing to expansion based content, it's not. If they are moving away from that expansion model, it's not because they don't like making money. It's not because they like having angry players.

    I feel like you are always under the impression that ANET only makes GOOD business decisions?
    Do you feel they are heading in the best direction for the game now?
    genuinely curious.

    A true friend of the crown

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Acheron.4731 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Vinceman.4572 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Maybe. I won't know until I've tried it

    Then you haven't watched their stream which is a pity because then you'll realize - and every intelligent human being will - that their system is not well-thought. The splitting into three different parts is not due to qol for the players. It's the monetization aspect only which is understandable from the business point but not for the greater good of the game.

    But that's a moot point anyways because Anet is a business that is providing a paid feature within the context of the game.

    This argument never gets old. Of course they are a business but everyone of us has their own opinion and can measure for himself if this decision is a good one or not. I won't convince you that I found it terrible and you won't convince me. The market will tell but since we're lacking an expansion that peaked revenues in the past, observed the layoffs, encountered the Deroir & JP debacle, had a disappointing LS announcement + MO leaving the company I doubt that there will be nice numbers in the next months. Where should they come from? That's a serious question for me.

    I don't need to watch a stream. Like any rational person, I will wait to actually experience it before I complain. If you guys think that complaining about paying for features is an approach to justifying Anet committing to expansion based content, it's not. If they are moving away from that expansion model, it's not because they don't like making money. It's not because they like having angry players.

    I feel like you are always under the impression that ANET only makes GOOD business decisions?
    Do you feel they are heading in the best direction for the game now?
    genuinely curious.

    Sorry, my crystal ball is broken so I don't see the value in guessing if it's the BEST direction.

    Do I think Anet offering these kinds of features LIKE THEY ALWAYS HAVE is a bad business decision? I don't see how anyone could. It hasn't been a problem for 7 years.

    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/

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Vinceman.4572 said:

    You know about the difference of a shareholder and a stakeholder, right?
    You and me are stakeholder because we have an interest in the company or in this case in their product. A shareholder is someone who has a stock - in this case NCSoft is meant as a company in the Korea Exchange - equivalent of the New York Stock Exchange at Wall Street. (Personally I don't own stocks from NCSoft)
    There's a difference in satisfying stakeholders and satisfying shareholders and in my view and of others we've seen an increase of imbalance between those interests starting with the layoffs in spring. NCSoft is not making money to run a usual business they need to grow otherwise the stock market will punish them and that affected and will affect Arenanet in the future. The game devs can be enthusiastic as they want, the hunt is on and trying to make money with a tool that is inferior to a tool from a single developer, had to be developed for 2 years (which is a joke) and then promoted like this is clearly one of the best indicators for the bleeding cow that has to be milked - 1x1 business economics.

    Yes I absolutely do ... I do those kinds of analysis all the time in my RL life.

    If anything, the layoffs in the spring sounded like a move in the best interests of both stakeholders and shareholders. Resources were being diverted from GW2 development ... and speculating here ... it didn't sound like those projects had management approval. I don't want fewer resources on GW2 (I don't see why any player would either). I'm pretty sure the people that invested in Anet didn't think that was a great idea either considering GW2 still likely has a projected ROI those shareholders expect from it for some period of time in the future. Sounds like someone who recently left had some plans of their own for how things should happen without running it by his boss and he got caught. Naughty Naughty.

    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/

  • Sojourner.4621Sojourner.4621 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Wakani.1829 said:

    @Dawdler.8521 said:
    Yeah, I'm sure everyone that work for a living have that sentiment too. I mean if your living costs are $1000 a month yet you earn $2000 a month, whats the even the point of the extra cash? Ask your employer to reduce your salary to $1000. No need for good money to go to waste.

    Before you rush to the defense, you should probably do some actual research on this subject. Arenanet could EASILY run gw2 without putting 95% of their content into the cashshop, if you're honestly believing anything different, then i don't think you know how the gaming industry works.
    Virtually almost all publishers these days, are pushing for Mobile-like monetization in PC gaming, because it allows them to push a new, bland, empty title every year, from any franchise, and make millions off the back of people who blindly support it.

    ask yourself, did they need all this money from monetization to MAKE guildwars2 ? - no. why?, because their previous game, GuildWars, wich had practically NO monetization, NO subscription fee, made them enough money to:

    Not have a single day of downtime on the servers, not even on patchdays.
    make 3 full scale expansions in just 3 years, the Original guildwars came out on April 26, 2005, and the third expansion was released on August 28, 2007.
    Build all of guild wars 2, and launch it.

    GW1 definitely didn't make them enough money to make Guild Wars 2. That's not how video games work. What really happened is they were funded by their publisher, NCSoft, to make Guild Wars 2 because they were able to convince them that the second could make enough money to fund its development. Just like Guild Wars 1 was developed not from the funds of a prior game, or the pockets of the developers, but from what essentially amounts to a loan from a publisher in exchange for a continuing cut of the future profits. That's how publishing works, off of investment capital.

    Meanwhile... I always 100% expected equipment templates to be monetized, if they existed at all... because it is extra storage space, which they have charged for since launch. The trait templates being monetized is annoying, but a minor inconvenience in the long term since you literally can store infinite builds via chat codes + notepad on your home computer. The cap for equipment templates of 6 is by far my biggest irritant, but because I refuse to use ARC I've been manually swapping anyway and will continue to do so.

  • @Vinceman.4572 said:

    @Seera.5916 said:
    I'm also like Obtena and I watched the stream. I don't judge something until I can actually play with it. Especially if the explicitly state in the stream that things can change. I can get a feel for if I think I will or will not like something, but I can't be sure until I've actually played with it.

    They worked 2 years on it and you think they can change the core within 3 weeks. Well, yeah, enough for that...

    Yeah, they will just try to fix some bugs they have before launch.
    For example, they said that they "have to make sure that the items in armory won't be deleted"...

    Carcharoth Lucian/Mini Chibii
    Augury Rock world
    PvE : [CdL] Les Chasseurs De Légendes
    WvW : [MIMs] Mobile Ingénieuse Et Marteau

  • GaijinGuy.8476GaijinGuy.8476 Member ✭✭✭

    @Knighthonor.4061 said:

    @style.6173 said:

    Its meant to do a task while also making money to keep the game running. Why are you all tripping on this?

    It’s thinking like this that got us into the micro transaction kitten show of a world we live in. You get people to spend money in game by making them enjoy playing with what they have already bought. When it is blatantly obvious that someone is trying to get as much cash out of you as possible it generally has the opposite effect.

  • Vinceman.4572Vinceman.4572 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Yes I absolutely do ... I do those kinds of analysis all the time in my RL life.

    If anything, the layoffs in the spring sounded like a move in the best interests of both stakeholders and shareholders. Resources were being diverted from GW2 development ... and speculating here ... it didn't sound like those projects had management approval. I don't want fewer resources on GW2 (I don't see why any player would either). I'm pretty sure the people that invested in Anet didn't think that was a great idea either considering GW2 still likely has a projected ROI those shareholders expect from it for some period of time in the future. Sounds like someone who recently left had some plans of their own for how things should happen without running it by his boss and he got caught. Naughty Naughty.

    So, if you have any knowledge about running a business or a company you should also be aware of having some kind of innovative things in the pipeline or newer technological inventions otherwise you'll be shipwrecked. The mounts that were brought into the game with PoF were such innovative product resulting in a positive outcome. (They also won prizes in the industry with it but that's an irrelevant fact in this discussion.)
    The point is revenues are going down again as the numbers from NCSoft showing and there isn't any innovation on the horizon and the cancelling of developing a new expansion which is wanted by the community and came two times with great innovations indicates that the ship has listed. That is backed by the design of the actual template and its function being inferior to a tool that was developed by a single person alone outside the company being monetized in the way they've shown us in the stream.
    I also don't believe MO got caught. It was always his intention to be creative and inventive and according to his statement unless it's not latrine rumor he didn't have the feeling that this will be possible at Arenanet any longer. Strong statement from a person that created the company and most likely had one of the best surveys over the inside.

    Let me speak about my personal situation about financing the company again because you too always repeat the argument of me and others wanting a free ride or as someone else did in this forum portraying us as parasites. I purchased all shared inventory slots, have maxed bank tabs, have additional character slots, bought the salvage-o-matics twice because shared slots didn't exist to that time, have bought some gems here and there for real money and I paid the maximum prices for vanilla, HoT and PoF each. The only thing where I haven't paid real money for are black lion keys because those actually are loot boxes and pure lottery - but that's another topic and thankfully not my cup of tea to deal with.
    Tell me, how could I have supported the company more than just throwing my money at them and not buying cars, a house, feed my family and enjoy other things like sports, hobbies & entertainment in real life?
    So, in other words I have been supporting this game very much and definitely more than a lot of casual players, people that already play other games and traders + users that have paid 0 bucks. I would even support them further and especially for a good template system that facilitates things and has a good & fluid mechanic with no shenanigans or other annoying circumstances but this is not the case here. The thing is worse than the already existens helper tool and that my dear is a real shame because Arenanet runs a serious company and should provide more professional performance than a single developer from the outside in his lonely chamber (sorry at delta for those words, just a stylistic device).
    That's why I'm arguing here and giving feedback to show them that I'm not convinced and not satisfied at all with their solution. I'm glad that the majority sees this as well and only a few against for whatever reasons (that I don't have to evaluate). I'm also aware that a certain group doesn't even raise their voice in forums/reddit no matter what judgement they have towards the system because that group won't be the target group for being a relevant mass in terms of business decisions.
    Do I think there will be a change regarding the templates and the business model? Not at all, the horse has already left the barn but I'm very much interested in the outcome and especially in NCSofts next but one numbers in february (the third quarter in november won't be that decisive).
    From a business analytical perspective the events and decisions in 2019 won't expect a solid & sustainable long-term future for the game/company.

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Yes I remember that part. I mean, that doesn't change my message.

    Sure it does. That one example you came up with, not only didn't conform to what you were saying - it was a clear example for the opposing view.

    It's just people being dishonest because they were not paying for a similar 3rd party feature. I don't really get the approach ... do you think people are that dense? They can't see that difference? Do you think that makes you credible?

    Oh, i surely hope they aren't that dense and will be able to easily see through the whole situation, and realize what the difference is. I can only hope that some day you will see it too.

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Vinceman.4572 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Yes I absolutely do ... I do those kinds of analysis all the time in my RL life.

    If anything, the layoffs in the spring sounded like a move in the best interests of both stakeholders and shareholders. Resources were being diverted from GW2 development ... and speculating here ... it didn't sound like those projects had management approval. I don't want fewer resources on GW2 (I don't see why any player would either). I'm pretty sure the people that invested in Anet didn't think that was a great idea either considering GW2 still likely has a projected ROI those shareholders expect from it for some period of time in the future. Sounds like someone who recently left had some plans of their own for how things should happen without running it by his boss and he got caught. Naughty Naughty.


    So, if you have any knowledge about running a business or a company you should also be aware of having some kind of innovative things in the pipeline or newer technological inventions otherwise you'll be shipwrecked.

    Sure ... but we are getting off track here. Not every product a company offers needs to be innovative; it simply needs to bring value to it's customers.

    Anet selling products isn't some exceptional to that and how they are offering it to customers is not exceptional within their framework either. You're going to talk about business, then you know how ridiculous it is to compare what the guy did to what Anet is doing. I don't know how Anet's feature is going to work until I get to try it ... THEN I will complain if I feel it's deficient WITHIN the context that it's an integrated feature of the game coming from a business ... not some hacky 3rd party add on that comes from where ever.

    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/

©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.