Howto: Meta achievement for normal players? - Page 2 — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home Guild Wars 2 Discussion

Howto: Meta achievement for normal players?

2>

Comments

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    The answer to any question related to:
    "How do I get rewards locked behind challenging content?"

    is similar across most any game, it's usually:
    "Get better at the game.

    That would be the correct question and answer, if strike missions would be solo content and not 10-players instanced group content.

    This is a MMORPG. Single player games are -> way.

    "Massively Multiplayer" is only the open world (PvE) and WvW in GW2, 10 players instanced content like strike missions, is not "Massively Multiplayer".

    The fact that instance scaling and player numbers were reduced in GW2 from where they originally where for MMORPGs (instanced content started as raid like content, dungeons were not available in the first MMORPGs to great extent) does not remove the aspect that this party content takes in this game type. Yes, GW2 requires even less players than most other MMORPGs for its instanced content, yet the necessity to organize and cooperate is shared with nearly all other MMORPGs.

    If at all it just paints an even sadder picture of this player base if even with reduced player necessity for instanced content, compared to rival games, players are incapable grouping in order to overcome challenges.

    I like raids, but raids are and were never a core-part or building-block of GW2, they came very late to GW2 and are still niche content and are not a success (thats why Anet made strike missions to get more players into raiding).

    Games with 10-man-instanced content as the main focus are -> way.

    You are missing the point. A central aspect of MMORPGs was, and always has been, the necessity for multiple players to work together to achieve goals. This is not about how many players are on map, in an instance or in a party. It's about an approach to content and gameplay. The main deviation here over the years is the accessibility for solo players.

    MMORPGs are NOT single player games where a lot of players do their own thing in the same spot, even if a lot of content in some games has devolved into this approach (mostly to grab as many players as possible for money purposes). Pretty much all successful MMORPGs at least on some level, usually endgame content, stick to the grouping and cooperation aspect to forge communities, bind players to social groups and enhance the gaming experience by having players cooperate.

    So my point remains: if you want single player game content, play a single player game, but don't complain that a MMORPG encourages or even requires multiple players to cooperate.

    There's cooperation in the open world, even if you try to deny it. The interesting thing about MMORPGs to me, and many others, has always been a persistant open world with a massive amounts of players. The feel of the world moving and living around you, even when you're not actively participating.

    What you find interesting is not my concern. I was referring to the origins of MMORPGs and how players interact and cooperate in those. The fact you get some passive boons and effects by tanding near other players is hardly cooperating. That could be achieved via NPCs as well.

    There are a lot of mechanics in the open world, it's not only about boons and effects. I couldn't care less about the origins of MMORPGs. I mean, sure, we could just add upgrading gear systems or a vertical gear progression. After all the original MMORPGs had those. Most players interacted in an open world, not in raids, even in those old MMORPGs. But I guess your own feelings are clouding your sight.

    and yet, context of where a word and game type come from matters, does it not? Most players participate in open world content without actively interacting with others, true. I do too when I do world bosses. I might even join a squad to get on the correct map, without as much as saying a single word. If that is the type of interaction you fancy from a MMORPG, sure you can have that here. But please don't pretend as though that constitutes player cooperation.

    Same thing can be said about SMs and raids when everyone knows what to do. Not actually interacting with others, just doing the mechanics. Is it the fault of the game? I'm not sure it would be good if a game forced someone to talk. I just talk to others freely, without being forced, and make friends that way. Don't pretend talking about mechanics creates communities.

    You can't be serious. You have obviously never attempted any challenging group content beyond a random player open world approach. The mere necessity for more organization leads to the development of communities. Best proof: there is multiple discords frequented by thousands of players in relation to raid content for example. How many open world discords are there?

    I'm saying challenging content leads to players having to create communities out of necessity. Solo open world content does not. Obviously applying the solo open world approach to this type of content will not see the development of communities. It;s the players who go beyond this superficial approach which are rewarded.

    I've raided in many games. Mostly in WoW during BC and WotLK and GW2.
    Tequatl and TT created communities that are still active today. I'm not sure which game you're playing.

    Wait, the 2 most difficult world bosses created communities? Are you trying to make my point for me? Along those lines, TT is abandoned UNLESS done via a semi organized group. TT has been nerfed far enough for players to catch on fast enough.

    I've never said I dislike group content. I dislike instanced content. Seems you're trying to interpret things in wrong ways.

    Instanced content is Arenanets way of separating challenging content from casual open world content. Given past reactions of this community on more challenging open world content (or anywhere outside of instanced content), I doubt this is going to change. So going with your preference would literally mean this game would receive no challenging content at all. Sure, that's also an approach.

    My preference are hard open world bosses. Nice of you to know my preference better than even me. I know that HoT impacted the community in a negative way, that's why I'm not trying to make the open world harder for others, ignoring my own preference.
    I'm not telling Anet what to do, they can go ahead and turn this game into a full on raiding game if they want. I'm simply stating that that will not work. The same way I'm stating that SMs will not work to revitalize raids.

    I literally said your preference is open world bosses (I might have said content, if this is the issue in terminology, my bad) and set that in perspective of this games development. What are you angry about?!

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    I fail to see how this factors into what I said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    You are missing the point. A central aspect of MMORPGs was, and always has been, the necessity for multiple players to work together to achieve goals. This is not about how many players are on map, in an instance or in a party. It's about an approach to content and gameplay. The main deviation here over the years is the accessibility for solo players.

    You seem to have lost track of what this argument is about. It's about challenging content forcing players to cooperate. I did not limit this notion to instanced content. I did apply this to the developers approach in this game, given they make instanced content challenging and leave open world content very easy.

    This goes back to me arguing that rewards are locked behind players having to get better. This has nothing to do with a players preference for instanced content or not. You literally just came up with that.

    This thread and the argument is about the Meta achievement only being accessible by doing SMs. SMs are instanced content, so it's obvious that you have to do the instanced content to get the meta achievement. I think you've lost track.

    Yes, but the main gripe is that the content is to difficult. You seem to be one of the few who disagreed with the content based on it being instanced.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    MMORPGs are also NOT lobby-based games. Instances and Raids killed socializing in various games, reducing it to a simple "hi" and "ty". The successful MMOs noticed that only a minority actually play instanced content on the highest difficulty, that's why they added low difficulties where "cooperation" is barely needed. There's no community to be found there, just players wanting to finish the dungeon / raid asap to get their gear.

    True, that's why most past MMORPGs did not have dungeons, but rather dungeon like areas which merely required loading into a different zone, sometimes requiring different amounts of people, but always a groups or even squad sized player count.

    MMORPGs were never single player, I never have to interact or socialize with any other player, type of affairs, even if GW2s open world lends its self to this approach. That's a very unqiue development specifically in this player base.

    Ah yes, so instanced content, where the open world is nothing more than a big lobby.
    It's not specific to this player base. Just look at other big MMOs like WoW or FFXIV. You just sit there and wait for raids or use the LFR systems. You don't even need anyone else to reach max lvl.

    Sure, but you also don't get endgame rewards in those games for doing the easy group content now do you?

    You actually do get endgame rewards for a lot of stuff in other games, not only raiding. If I learned one thing from the titanforging system from WoW, it is that people don't raid to have fun, but to get better gear. Once you could get better gear from easier raids, most just stopped doing raids. Pretty telling now, is it?

    The titenforging system was one of THE universally accepted worst gearing decisions and systems ever designed. It's rather telling Blizzard has gone back on that system. But please, do make mention of more terrible rng systems in other games trying to make a point.

    Yeah, it was a bad system, but that doesn't matter in this context. It made clear however that most people don't raid out of fun in that game. They are just in it for the rewards.

    That has nothing to do with what I stated: you don't get endgame rewards in easy content. On the contrary, the system you mentioned was in part so despised because it shifted end game rewards away from the players and into a rng system. I fail to see how this disproves what I stated. Overall all MMORPGs gate endgame rewards behind the highest games content.

    The system was despised because players could RNG their way into higher itemlvl tiers. Players doing easy content could just get heroic titanforged equipment, so not many people bothered with the higher difficulties. They were only raiding for the rewards, not out of fun.

    Yes, I still fail to see how this disproves what I said:
    MMORPGs lock rewards behind highest endgame content. Want to try again?

    Man, one emote surely is the highest of endgame rewards. I see you still don't get why people play games.

    Even better, so if the reward locked behind the content is not that valuable, even better. Win-win.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    His point also remains: If you want lobby based co-op content, play lobby co-op games. Complaining about players not wanting to do certain content and leading them to other games is just gatekeeping.

    I was not the one to bring up group content. I merely mentioned that in just about any game, even MMORPGs, the usual approach to getting challenging content rewards was getting better at the game. Here I'll quote myself:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    The answer to any question related to:
    "How do I get rewards locked behind challenging content?"

    is similar across most any game, it's usually:
    "Get better at the game.

    You can disagree with this notion and demand as many rewards as possible be not gated behind skill, that does not change the fact though that skill very often does factor into reward availability.

    You brought up group content simply by stating "MMOS are not a single-player" games. You yourself linked "challenge" to group content and coordination. I'm all for difficult content, sadly the own skill doesn't really translate well into group content. I mean, a skilled group could just carry you, even though you're the worst player in the game. There's something wrong when the difficulty doesn't come from the actual game, but instead from grouping.

    That's where you and I disagree. I see grouping and community, be it guilds, friends, active cooperation, etc. as corner concepts of a MMORPG. You seem not to. You said it yourself, a skilled group could easily carry anyone through any content. I'm sure there is quite a few players who have guilds helping them out, we certainly do in some of my more casual guilds.

    I see grouping as a cornerstone of MMORPGs, just not grouping up for some lobby-based systems that isolate you from the massive world. I loved guild missions, being able to cooperate with other guilds in the open world. But Anet then added the option to instance them and even stopped developing them.

    Yes, and the guilds I am in still do them, with their members. I do agree though that guild missions overall did not achieve the goal they were likely set out to do: get more people to find a guild and others to play together with. That's my opinion though.

    After leading enough guild missions, I've grown tired of them. They are always the same. If you do something often enough, no matter how much fun it is, after a while it starts to get boring if nothing changes.

    Which does not disprove that communities form around group content which they will complete together. Yet playing this game as a single player game will yield no success or reward.

    ???
    Like I said, I've nothing against group content, just instanced content.

    Which is not the issue here. Never has been.

    SMs are instanced content. That has been the issue from the start.

    No it hasn't. The issue has been for most posters that the content is to difficult. If it has, I am unsure what you are arguing with me though since I've primarily been arguing about content difficulty. I could care less if instanced or not.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Also it doesn't matter, Anet already said raid participation is low. SMs won't change that. It was obvious from the start that would happen. Instanced content is just not good for a massive amount of players.

    Actually, that is untrue. Arenanet were rather surprised about the participation in raids at the beginning and throughout of HoT. So from that angle, your statement is untrue. Raids were very successful in the first few years. It is not until rather recently that raids have started struggling, around the time of PoF, which can also be a result of lack of developer attention to this content.

    I'd rather see it the other way around: raids used to be populated enough in the past and the recent strike implementation shows that the developers are trying to get back to that state. Otherwise they would have simply shelved instanced content all together.

    It's true, just look at the post from Andew Gray: "the biggest challenge in creating more is the small audience they attract.".
    Raids used to be populated because people played them for the rewards, namely the legendary armor. After getting that many just stopped bothering with them. Speaks volumes to me about whether they deemed it fun.

    Yes, I was talking about the initial years of raids, not the current state. I was challenging your comment that:"this was obvious from the start". Which is plain untrue.

    "This was obvious from the start" was about SMs not being able to save raids. Of course the initial time was successful, Anet gated a unique tier set behind certain content.

    That was unclear. Then I misunderstood. As far as the success or failure of strikes, since I don't have Arenanet metrics, I'd refrain from making judgement calls just yet.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    SMs are just a band aid fix they're trying to use to get people to raid, so that all the work put into them doesn't go to waste.

    Sure, that might be.

    I'll repeat what I said though: the fact the devs are trying to hold on to this content is rather telling that they feel it is necessary.

    It is also rather telling how much resources go into raids at the moment. I think it's only natural to not want effort to go to waste, no matter if the actual result was worth it.

    Telling to you, seems to me you have given up on content which you never participated in, while the developers have not.

    Seems to me you don't properly read. I've raided in the past, like previously stated, but it's always nice to see baseless assumptions. I'm just sharing a common sentiment a lot of players have. Is it that strange to you, that people may have a different opinion on things, after having tried it out?

    https://massivelyop.com/2020/02/04/the-daily-grind-do-you-avoid-mmorpg-raiding-and-why/

    https://massivelyop.com/2020/02/06/vague-patch-notes-if-people-arent-raiding-in-an-mmo-its-not-because-its-too-hard/

    Those articles only confirm that the developers are actively trying to enable players to take on instanced content.

    Also you might want to take a look at those comment sections. Seems to me the second article is an opinion piece not shared by pretty much EVERY person in the comments. So, if it's an article based on an opinion, which is not shared among a vocal part of the readership, of how much value is the article? Or better yet, of how much objective value is it besides an additional opinion not worth more than yours or mine?

    Of course it isn't shared by everyone. It is shared among the vocal part of the readership there, if you had read the comments. I was merely sharing the article to show that is not only my opinion.

    The only objective thing we have is what Anet said: "the biggest challenge in creating more is the small audience they attract".
    I was offering suggestions as to why that audience is small. If Anet really thinks it is just a "difficulty" problem and they actually able to save raids with SMs, I'll be surprised. My opinion is that it is an inherent problem with instanced content.

    Well in that case thanks for sharing another opinion, though I had read the articles in the past. Yes, ultimately it lies with Arenanet and their metrics and decisions how to approach this.

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 12, 2020

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    The answer to any question related to:
    "How do I get rewards locked behind challenging content?"

    is similar across most any game, it's usually:
    "Get better at the game.

    That would be the correct question and answer, if strike missions would be solo content and not 10-players instanced group content.

    This is a MMORPG. Single player games are -> way.

    "Massively Multiplayer" is only the open world (PvE) and WvW in GW2, 10 players instanced content like strike missions, is not "Massively Multiplayer".

    The fact that instance scaling and player numbers were reduced in GW2 from where they originally where for MMORPGs (instanced content started as raid like content, dungeons were not available in the first MMORPGs to great extent) does not remove the aspect that this party content takes in this game type. Yes, GW2 requires even less players than most other MMORPGs for its instanced content, yet the necessity to organize and cooperate is shared with nearly all other MMORPGs.

    If at all it just paints an even sadder picture of this player base if even with reduced player necessity for instanced content, compared to rival games, players are incapable grouping in order to overcome challenges.

    I like raids, but raids are and were never a core-part or building-block of GW2, they came very late to GW2 and are still niche content and are not a success (thats why Anet made strike missions to get more players into raiding).

    Games with 10-man-instanced content as the main focus are -> way.

    You are missing the point. A central aspect of MMORPGs was, and always has been, the necessity for multiple players to work together to achieve goals.

    Actually, you are missing the point, because this discussion is not about MMORPGs in general, but about GW2.
    GW2 did lots of things different (aka better, at least for the players that came to GW2 because of this, bought the core-game and made GW2 a big success at that time) than "other" MMORPGs and this was/is still the foundation of GW2. And 10-man-instanced content was in the first years not even a part of the original GW2 and its still not the heart of GW2.

    True, it is about GW2. I made a connection to competitors in the field and past games which established this segment. You can make an argument that GW2 should be even less similar with its competition. In which case it would take on a stand alone name and could not be considered a MMORPG any longer given it shares no similarities with past or other current titles of that genre. Which brings me back to what I said: this is a MMORPG (still). Feel free to argue the game should change away as much as you like.

    @Zok.4956 said:
    GW2s own vision of player interaction on a massive scale in PVE is (or at least: it was) the open world, where players come together without any gatekeepers or prerequisites, and without any "kill-stealing" and without any hard skill-requirements etc. to achieve common goals (i.e. kill a world boss) as a friendly and cooperative community.

    That is untrue. Challenging instanced content was always on the table and was added in form of dungeons and shortly after in form of fractals. You are selective in remembering what this game has and had to offer.

  • Raknar.4735Raknar.4735 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 12, 2020

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    The answer to any question related to:
    "How do I get rewards locked behind challenging content?"

    is similar across most any game, it's usually:
    "Get better at the game.

    That would be the correct question and answer, if strike missions would be solo content and not 10-players instanced group content.

    This is a MMORPG. Single player games are -> way.

    "Massively Multiplayer" is only the open world (PvE) and WvW in GW2, 10 players instanced content like strike missions, is not "Massively Multiplayer".

    The fact that instance scaling and player numbers were reduced in GW2 from where they originally where for MMORPGs (instanced content started as raid like content, dungeons were not available in the first MMORPGs to great extent) does not remove the aspect that this party content takes in this game type. Yes, GW2 requires even less players than most other MMORPGs for its instanced content, yet the necessity to organize and cooperate is shared with nearly all other MMORPGs.

    If at all it just paints an even sadder picture of this player base if even with reduced player necessity for instanced content, compared to rival games, players are incapable grouping in order to overcome challenges.

    I like raids, but raids are and were never a core-part or building-block of GW2, they came very late to GW2 and are still niche content and are not a success (thats why Anet made strike missions to get more players into raiding).

    Games with 10-man-instanced content as the main focus are -> way.

    You are missing the point. A central aspect of MMORPGs was, and always has been, the necessity for multiple players to work together to achieve goals. This is not about how many players are on map, in an instance or in a party. It's about an approach to content and gameplay. The main deviation here over the years is the accessibility for solo players.

    MMORPGs are NOT single player games where a lot of players do their own thing in the same spot, even if a lot of content in some games has devolved into this approach (mostly to grab as many players as possible for money purposes). Pretty much all successful MMORPGs at least on some level, usually endgame content, stick to the grouping and cooperation aspect to forge communities, bind players to social groups and enhance the gaming experience by having players cooperate.

    So my point remains: if you want single player game content, play a single player game, but don't complain that a MMORPG encourages or even requires multiple players to cooperate.

    There's cooperation in the open world, even if you try to deny it. The interesting thing about MMORPGs to me, and many others, has always been a persistant open world with a massive amounts of players. The feel of the world moving and living around you, even when you're not actively participating.

    What you find interesting is not my concern. I was referring to the origins of MMORPGs and how players interact and cooperate in those. The fact you get some passive boons and effects by tanding near other players is hardly cooperating. That could be achieved via NPCs as well.

    There are a lot of mechanics in the open world, it's not only about boons and effects. I couldn't care less about the origins of MMORPGs. I mean, sure, we could just add upgrading gear systems or a vertical gear progression. After all the original MMORPGs had those. Most players interacted in an open world, not in raids, even in those old MMORPGs. But I guess your own feelings are clouding your sight.

    and yet, context of where a word and game type come from matters, does it not? Most players participate in open world content without actively interacting with others, true. I do too when I do world bosses. I might even join a squad to get on the correct map, without as much as saying a single word. If that is the type of interaction you fancy from a MMORPG, sure you can have that here. But please don't pretend as though that constitutes player cooperation.

    Same thing can be said about SMs and raids when everyone knows what to do. Not actually interacting with others, just doing the mechanics. Is it the fault of the game? I'm not sure it would be good if a game forced someone to talk. I just talk to others freely, without being forced, and make friends that way. Don't pretend talking about mechanics creates communities.

    You can't be serious. You have obviously never attempted any challenging group content beyond a random player open world approach. The mere necessity for more organization leads to the development of communities. Best proof: there is multiple discords frequented by thousands of players in relation to raid content for example. How many open world discords are there?

    I'm saying challenging content leads to players having to create communities out of necessity. Solo open world content does not. Obviously applying the solo open world approach to this type of content will not see the development of communities. It;s the players who go beyond this superficial approach which are rewarded.

    I've raided in many games. Mostly in WoW during BC and WotLK and GW2.
    Tequatl and TT created communities that are still active today. I'm not sure which game you're playing.

    Wait, the 2 most difficult world bosses created communities? Are you trying to make my point for me? Along those lines, TT is abandoned UNLESS done via a semi organized group. TT has been nerfed far enough for players to catch on fast enough.

    I've never said I dislike group content. I dislike instanced content. Seems you're trying to interpret things in wrong ways.

    Instanced content is Arenanets way of separating challenging content from casual open world content. Given past reactions of this community on more challenging open world content (or anywhere outside of instanced content), I doubt this is going to change. So going with your preference would literally mean this game would receive no challenging content at all. Sure, that's also an approach.

    My preference are hard open world bosses. Nice of you to know my preference better than even me. I know that HoT impacted the community in a negative way, that's why I'm not trying to make the open world harder for others, ignoring my own preference.
    I'm not telling Anet what to do, they can go ahead and turn this game into a full on raiding game if they want. I'm simply stating that that will not work. The same way I'm stating that SMs will not work to revitalize raids.

    I literally said your preference is open world bosses (I might have said content, if this is the issue in terminology, my bad) and set that in perspective of this games development. What are you angry about?!

    Just angry about someone speaking like he knows what I want. Reminds me of the "You think you do, but you don't" from a certain Blizz employee. After all you said I've never raided, that I like the easy open world content etc.
    Making assumptions about a person without knowing them is not always the best idea. Same goes for telling someone to play another game.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    I fail to see how this factors into what I said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    You are missing the point. A central aspect of MMORPGs was, and always has been, the necessity for multiple players to work together to achieve goals. This is not about how many players are on map, in an instance or in a party. It's about an approach to content and gameplay. The main deviation here over the years is the accessibility for solo players.

    You seem to have lost track of what this argument is about. It's about challenging content forcing players to cooperate. I did not limit this notion to instanced content. I did apply this to the developers approach in this game, given they make instanced content challenging and leave open world content very easy.

    This goes back to me arguing that rewards are locked behind players having to get better. This has nothing to do with a players preference for instanced content or not. You literally just came up with that.

    This thread and the argument is about the Meta achievement only being accessible by doing SMs. SMs are instanced content, so it's obvious that you have to do the instanced content to get the meta achievement. I think you've lost track.

    Yes, but the main gripe is that the content is to difficult. You seem to be one of the few who disagreed with the content based on it being instanced.

    I initially just disagreed with your response to @Zok.4956, where he talked about 10man player content, and you quickly swept open world content under the same rug of single player content.

    A central aspect of MMORPGs was, and always has been, the necessity for multiple players to work together to achieve goals. This is not about how many players are on map, in an instance or in a party.

    That's the part I vehemently disagreed with, since the amount of players is the central aspect of an MMORPG to me and many others.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    MMORPGs are also NOT lobby-based games. Instances and Raids killed socializing in various games, reducing it to a simple "hi" and "ty". The successful MMOs noticed that only a minority actually play instanced content on the highest difficulty, that's why they added low difficulties where "cooperation" is barely needed. There's no community to be found there, just players wanting to finish the dungeon / raid asap to get their gear.

    True, that's why most past MMORPGs did not have dungeons, but rather dungeon like areas which merely required loading into a different zone, sometimes requiring different amounts of people, but always a groups or even squad sized player count.

    MMORPGs were never single player, I never have to interact or socialize with any other player, type of affairs, even if GW2s open world lends its self to this approach. That's a very unqiue development specifically in this player base.

    Ah yes, so instanced content, where the open world is nothing more than a big lobby.
    It's not specific to this player base. Just look at other big MMOs like WoW or FFXIV. You just sit there and wait for raids or use the LFR systems. You don't even need anyone else to reach max lvl.

    Sure, but you also don't get endgame rewards in those games for doing the easy group content now do you?

    You actually do get endgame rewards for a lot of stuff in other games, not only raiding. If I learned one thing from the titanforging system from WoW, it is that people don't raid to have fun, but to get better gear. Once you could get better gear from easier raids, most just stopped doing raids. Pretty telling now, is it?

    The titenforging system was one of THE universally accepted worst gearing decisions and systems ever designed. It's rather telling Blizzard has gone back on that system. But please, do make mention of more terrible rng systems in other games trying to make a point.

    Yeah, it was a bad system, but that doesn't matter in this context. It made clear however that most people don't raid out of fun in that game. They are just in it for the rewards.

    That has nothing to do with what I stated: you don't get endgame rewards in easy content. On the contrary, the system you mentioned was in part so despised because it shifted end game rewards away from the players and into a rng system. I fail to see how this disproves what I stated. Overall all MMORPGs gate endgame rewards behind the highest games content.

    The system was despised because players could RNG their way into higher itemlvl tiers. Players doing easy content could just get heroic titanforged equipment, so not many people bothered with the higher difficulties. They were only raiding for the rewards, not out of fun.

    Yes, I still fail to see how this disproves what I said:
    MMORPGs lock rewards behind highest endgame content. Want to try again?

    Man, one emote surely is the highest of endgame rewards. I see you still don't get why people play games.

    Even better, so if the reward locked behind the content is not that valuable, even better. Win-win.

    It may not be that valuable to you. But i bet a lot of roleplayers would like to have it. It's strange to gate specific rewards to a different type of content. It would be like gating a fishing pole behind a jumping puzzle or selling kid toys, but restricting the purchase to 18+.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    His point also remains: If you want lobby based co-op content, play lobby co-op games. Complaining about players not wanting to do certain content and leading them to other games is just gatekeeping.

    I was not the one to bring up group content. I merely mentioned that in just about any game, even MMORPGs, the usual approach to getting challenging content rewards was getting better at the game. Here I'll quote myself:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    The answer to any question related to:
    "How do I get rewards locked behind challenging content?"

    is similar across most any game, it's usually:
    "Get better at the game.

    You can disagree with this notion and demand as many rewards as possible be not gated behind skill, that does not change the fact though that skill very often does factor into reward availability.

    You brought up group content simply by stating "MMOS are not a single-player" games. You yourself linked "challenge" to group content and coordination. I'm all for difficult content, sadly the own skill doesn't really translate well into group content. I mean, a skilled group could just carry you, even though you're the worst player in the game. There's something wrong when the difficulty doesn't come from the actual game, but instead from grouping.

    That's where you and I disagree. I see grouping and community, be it guilds, friends, active cooperation, etc. as corner concepts of a MMORPG. You seem not to. You said it yourself, a skilled group could easily carry anyone through any content. I'm sure there is quite a few players who have guilds helping them out, we certainly do in some of my more casual guilds.

    I see grouping as a cornerstone of MMORPGs, just not grouping up for some lobby-based systems that isolate you from the massive world. I loved guild missions, being able to cooperate with other guilds in the open world. But Anet then added the option to instance them and even stopped developing them.

    Yes, and the guilds I am in still do them, with their members. I do agree though that guild missions overall did not achieve the goal they were likely set out to do: get more people to find a guild and others to play together with. That's my opinion though.

    After leading enough guild missions, I've grown tired of them. They are always the same. If you do something often enough, no matter how much fun it is, after a while it starts to get boring if nothing changes.

    Which does not disprove that communities form around group content which they will complete together. Yet playing this game as a single player game will yield no success or reward.

    ???
    Like I said, I've nothing against group content, just instanced content.

    Which is not the issue here. Never has been.

    SMs are instanced content. That has been the issue from the start.

    No it hasn't. The issue has been for most posters that the content is to difficult. If it has, I am unsure what you are arguing with me though since I've primarily been arguing about content difficulty. I could care less if instanced or not.

    @Zok.4956 was arguing about raids being 10man instanced niche content, you said the amount of players doesn't matter. Amount of players at the same place at the same time is one of the biggest reasons I play MMORPGs.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Also it doesn't matter, Anet already said raid participation is low. SMs won't change that. It was obvious from the start that would happen. Instanced content is just not good for a massive amount of players.

    Actually, that is untrue. Arenanet were rather surprised about the participation in raids at the beginning and throughout of HoT. So from that angle, your statement is untrue. Raids were very successful in the first few years. It is not until rather recently that raids have started struggling, around the time of PoF, which can also be a result of lack of developer attention to this content.

    I'd rather see it the other way around: raids used to be populated enough in the past and the recent strike implementation shows that the developers are trying to get back to that state. Otherwise they would have simply shelved instanced content all together.

    It's true, just look at the post from Andew Gray: "the biggest challenge in creating more is the small audience they attract.".
    Raids used to be populated because people played them for the rewards, namely the legendary armor. After getting that many just stopped bothering with them. Speaks volumes to me about whether they deemed it fun.

    Yes, I was talking about the initial years of raids, not the current state. I was challenging your comment that:"this was obvious from the start". Which is plain untrue.

    "This was obvious from the start" was about SMs not being able to save raids. Of course the initial time was successful, Anet gated a unique tier set behind certain content.

    That was unclear. Then I misunderstood. As far as the success or failure of strikes, since I don't have Arenanet metrics, I'd refrain from making judgement calls just yet.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    SMs are just a band aid fix they're trying to use to get people to raid, so that all the work put into them doesn't go to waste.

    Sure, that might be.

    I'll repeat what I said though: the fact the devs are trying to hold on to this content is rather telling that they feel it is necessary.

    It is also rather telling how much resources go into raids at the moment. I think it's only natural to not want effort to go to waste, no matter if the actual result was worth it.

    Telling to you, seems to me you have given up on content which you never participated in, while the developers have not.

    Seems to me you don't properly read. I've raided in the past, like previously stated, but it's always nice to see baseless assumptions. I'm just sharing a common sentiment a lot of players have. Is it that strange to you, that people may have a different opinion on things, after having tried it out?

    https://massivelyop.com/2020/02/04/the-daily-grind-do-you-avoid-mmorpg-raiding-and-why/

    https://massivelyop.com/2020/02/06/vague-patch-notes-if-people-arent-raiding-in-an-mmo-its-not-because-its-too-hard/

    Those articles only confirm that the developers are actively trying to enable players to take on instanced content.

    Also you might want to take a look at those comment sections. Seems to me the second article is an opinion piece not shared by pretty much EVERY person in the comments. So, if it's an article based on an opinion, which is not shared among a vocal part of the readership, of how much value is the article? Or better yet, of how much objective value is it besides an additional opinion not worth more than yours or mine?

    Of course it isn't shared by everyone. It is shared among the vocal part of the readership there, if you had read the comments. I was merely sharing the article to show that is not only my opinion.

    The only objective thing we have is what Anet said: "the biggest challenge in creating more is the small audience they attract".
    I was offering suggestions as to why that audience is small. If Anet really thinks it is just a "difficulty" problem and they actually able to save raids with SMs, I'll be surprised. My opinion is that it is an inherent problem with instanced content.

    Well in that case thanks for sharing another opinion, though I had read the articles in the past. Yes, ultimately it lies with Arenanet and their metrics and decisions how to approach this.

    I agree.

    You have a heart of gold. Don't let them take it from you.
    Remaster confirmed! Umbasa!

  • @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Galmac.4680 said:
    Hey,

    the meta achievement for "Shadow in the ice" requires 37 achievements, and if you skip the strike mission achievements, you will get 30 of them. So, how can a normal player without raid experience get 7 other achievements from that list to get the meta achievement? I tried strike missions, but with pug groups it was a sure fail. Why are that new strike missions that hard?

    Galmac

    The new strike missions are meant to be introductions to raids. Without getting more people into raids, they can't justify developing them. One of the obstacles they have found from feedback is the difficulty jump, so they are attempting to overcome that by making ever increasingly harder Strike Missions.

    Will it work? Probably not. Should it be part of the meta? Tough one since they need a carrot to encourage players in and hopefully inspire players to try something harder.

    ANet already tried putting difficulty slopes into the existing raids. This did not suffice for players whose only real interest in that type of content was Legendary Armor, "seeing the story," or both. Making a shallower slope is not likely to work, either. Randulf is correct.

    Think about it. If player reactions to GW2 are any judge, the vast majority of players see the story, then keep playing only for rewards. How many times have we seen complaints about the rewards in GW2 being insufficient? Way too many. Meta achievements are one of the few current rewards which are likely to entice open-world-only players to keep playing consistently. Tying them to an initiative to make raid development worthwhile is going to alienate some (maybe a lot) of those players. It's not like the reward is all that significant, either.

    All of the rhetoric about "any meaningful rewards should require playing harder content" is unspoken recognition that ANet is not pushing such content out because there is little interest in it. Without increased interest, such players are not going to get more of what they want at a pace that can sustain their interest. It's a dilemma for ANet. GW2 can ill-afford at this late date to bleed significant numbers of players. Will they lose more interest by alienating those who don't want increased difficulty, or by failing to make harder instanced content more appealing to larger numbers of players?

    I don't know the answer. What is suspect, though, is that the need to appeal to more players with the same amount of development effort is a sign of: how resource intensive story is (especially for content that is largely one-and-done for most players); NCSoft pressure to increase revenue (or keep it stable) without increasing costs; both; and/or other factors unknown to us.

    None of this is a good sign to me. Ideally, the "more challenge, please" and the "things are fine as is" players would both contribute to the upkeep of the game. The fact that ANet seem to feel they cannot continue providing enough content to satisfy both types is worrisome.

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

  • Svarty.8019Svarty.8019 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 12, 2020

    @Galmac.4680 said:
    Why are that new strike missions that hard?

    Some redacted players on the forums asked for "challenging content".

    Content Design Lead, Andrew Gray, wants the game to be raid-oriented, as he said here: https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/97028/a-message-from-andrew-gray/p1
    He thinks that he should cater more to hardcore raiders.

    Whether that's the best course of action or not is ... up for debate. I guess that "small audience" will be happy about the decision.

    @Zok.4956 said:
    GW2s own vision of player interaction on a massive scale in PVE is (or at least: it was) the open world, where players come together without any gatekeepers or prerequisites, and without any "kill-stealing" and without any hard skill-requirements etc. to achieve common goals (i.e. kill a world boss) as a friendly and cooperative community.

    I can tell you that there were some less than complimentary statements made when our Drakkar just failed...

    This post contains my opinion.

  • Svarty.8019Svarty.8019 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 12, 2020

    double post

    This post contains my opinion.

  • Pirogen.9561Pirogen.9561 Member ✭✭✭

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Yeah, it was a bad system, but that doesn't matter in this context. It made clear however that most people don't raid out of fun in that game. They are just in it for the rewards.

    Yes. And once you get your reward you stop doing it.

    In other games raids work for some people for some time. Because each time you get new raid, it invalidates old rewards. So you are "forced" to raid/grind again. And again. And ... until you get burnout and never touch the whole game again. Ever.

    In GW2 rewards(including gear) are never invalidated. So raids don't work. As in: its popular until you get what you want and then its dead.

  • Lamont.5973Lamont.5973 Member ✭✭✭

    I did not have any problem with getting the achieves but I do agree with the OP, strike missions should not have been required for the meta

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 12, 2020

    @Svarty.8019 said:

    @Galmac.4680 said:
    Why are that new strike missions that hard?

    Some redacted players on the forums asked for "challenging content".

    Content Design Lead, Andrew Gray, wants the game to be raid-oriented, as he said here: https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/97028/a-message-from-andrew-gray/p1
    He thinks that he should cater more to hardcore raiders.

    Whether that's the best course of action or not is ... up for debate. I guess that "small audience" will be happy about the decision.

    You must have misread. He literally states that they should appeal to both communities, and the hardcore or challenging content segment of the player base has been neglected long enough, so they might have to refocus some attention to developing such content. That's hardly making the game raid oriented, it's literally just saying the game should have something besides open world content.

    As far as the "small audience", what ever Arenanet do, they have to focus more on the paying and money spending part of this community, given their latest quarterly report. I'm not going to assume to know if this applies to casual players or more hardcore players. The devs have the metrics on that.

  • Zok.4956Zok.4956 Member ✭✭✭

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    The answer to any question related to:
    "How do I get rewards locked behind challenging content?"

    is similar across most any game, it's usually:
    "Get better at the game.

    That would be the correct question and answer, if strike missions would be solo content and not 10-players instanced group content.

    This is a MMORPG. Single player games are -> way.

    "Massively Multiplayer" is only the open world (PvE) and WvW in GW2, 10 players instanced content like strike missions, is not "Massively Multiplayer".

    The fact that instance scaling and player numbers were reduced in GW2 from where they originally where for MMORPGs (instanced content started as raid like content, dungeons were not available in the first MMORPGs to great extent) does not remove the aspect that this party content takes in this game type. Yes, GW2 requires even less players than most other MMORPGs for its instanced content, yet the necessity to organize and cooperate is shared with nearly all other MMORPGs.

    If at all it just paints an even sadder picture of this player base if even with reduced player necessity for instanced content, compared to rival games, players are incapable grouping in order to overcome challenges.

    I like raids, but raids are and were never a core-part or building-block of GW2, they came very late to GW2 and are still niche content and are not a success (thats why Anet made strike missions to get more players into raiding).

    Games with 10-man-instanced content as the main focus are -> way.

    You are missing the point. A central aspect of MMORPGs was, and always has been, the necessity for multiple players to work together to achieve goals.

    Actually, you are missing the point, because this discussion is not about MMORPGs in general, but about GW2.
    GW2 did lots of things different (aka better, at least for the players that came to GW2 because of this, bought the core-game and made GW2 a big success at that time) than "other" MMORPGs and this was/is still the foundation of GW2. And 10-man-instanced content was in the first years not even a part of the original GW2 and its still not the heart of GW2.

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    True, it is about GW2. I made a connection to competitors in the field and past games which established this segment.

    I couldn't care less about those other games.

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:
    GW2s own vision of player interaction on a massive scale in PVE is (or at least: it was) the open world, where players come together without any gatekeepers or prerequisites, and without any "kill-stealing" and without any hard skill-requirements etc. to achieve common goals (i.e. kill a world boss) as a friendly and cooperative community.

    That is untrue.

    What exactely in my above statement is untrue?

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    Challenging instanced content was always on the table and was added in form of dungeons and shortly after in form of fractals. You are selective in remembering what this game has and had to offer.

    It looks like you lost track of the discussion. I did not write anything about Dungeons or Fractals in our discussion.

    https://www.gw2gh.com/ - A GW2-Guild-Hall.
    Register and check your guild leaderboard to see who is the best in your guild and who finished achievements first.

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    The answer to any question related to:
    "How do I get rewards locked behind challenging content?"

    is similar across most any game, it's usually:
    "Get better at the game.

    That would be the correct question and answer, if strike missions would be solo content and not 10-players instanced group content.

    This is a MMORPG. Single player games are -> way.

    "Massively Multiplayer" is only the open world (PvE) and WvW in GW2, 10 players instanced content like strike missions, is not "Massively Multiplayer".

    The fact that instance scaling and player numbers were reduced in GW2 from where they originally where for MMORPGs (instanced content started as raid like content, dungeons were not available in the first MMORPGs to great extent) does not remove the aspect that this party content takes in this game type. Yes, GW2 requires even less players than most other MMORPGs for its instanced content, yet the necessity to organize and cooperate is shared with nearly all other MMORPGs.

    If at all it just paints an even sadder picture of this player base if even with reduced player necessity for instanced content, compared to rival games, players are incapable grouping in order to overcome challenges.

    I like raids, but raids are and were never a core-part or building-block of GW2, they came very late to GW2 and are still niche content and are not a success (thats why Anet made strike missions to get more players into raiding).

    Games with 10-man-instanced content as the main focus are -> way.

    You are missing the point. A central aspect of MMORPGs was, and always has been, the necessity for multiple players to work together to achieve goals.

    Actually, you are missing the point, because this discussion is not about MMORPGs in general, but about GW2.
    GW2 did lots of things different (aka better, at least for the players that came to GW2 because of this, bought the core-game and made GW2 a big success at that time) than "other" MMORPGs and this was/is still the foundation of GW2. And 10-man-instanced content was in the first years not even a part of the original GW2 and its still not the heart of GW2.

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    True, it is about GW2. I made a connection to competitors in the field and past games which established this segment.

    I couldn't care less about those other games.

    That is fine, but you decided to comment on my reference to MMORPGs. Feel free to call GW2 anything you like, but please don't refer to it as a MMORPG then when it has lost all similarities with the genre.

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:
    GW2s own vision of player interaction on a massive scale in PVE is (or at least: it was) the open world, where players come together without any gatekeepers or prerequisites, and without any "kill-stealing" and without any hard skill-requirements etc. to achieve common goals (i.e. kill a world boss) as a friendly and cooperative community.

    That is untrue.

    What exactely in my above statement is untrue?

    That this games focus has been on massive scale in PVE in the open world. That developed over time, it was certainly not the original concept no in the games original release. Or at the very least it was not the unique concept when the game launched.

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    Challenging instanced content was always on the table and was added in form of dungeons and shortly after in form of fractals. You are selective in remembering what this game has and had to offer.

    It looks like you lost track of the discussion. I did not write anything about Dungeons or Fractals in our discussion.

    No, but you referenced challenging instanced content as though it was never intended. Which again, is untrue.

  • mbhalo.1547mbhalo.1547 Member ✭✭✭

    As a normal, pretty casual player i finished meta achievement within a week with relative ease, without any of the strike mission achievements, i think your math is wrong, OP.

  • Svarty.8019Svarty.8019 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Pirogen.9561 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Yeah, it was a bad system, but that doesn't matter in this context. It made clear however that most people don't raid out of fun in that game. They are just in it for the rewards.

    Yes. And once you get your reward you stop doing it.

    In other games raids work for some people for some time. Because each time you get new raid, it invalidates old rewards. So you are "forced" to raid/grind again. And again. And ... until you get burnout and never touch the whole game again. Ever.

    In GW2 rewards(including gear) are never invalidated. So raids don't work. As in: its popular until you get what you want and then its dead.

    I would argue that the 1000th chest concept is OKAY, but map currencies are far superior because they can be used in future content to drive encourage people to participate in older activities.

    This post contains my opinion.

  • Zok.4956Zok.4956 Member ✭✭✭
    edited February 12, 2020

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    The answer to any question related to:
    "How do I get rewards locked behind challenging content?"

    is similar across most any game, it's usually:
    "Get better at the game.

    That would be the correct question and answer, if strike missions would be solo content and not 10-players instanced group content.

    This is a MMORPG. Single player games are -> way.

    "Massively Multiplayer" is only the open world (PvE) and WvW in GW2, 10 players instanced content like strike missions, is not "Massively Multiplayer".

    The fact that instance scaling and player numbers were reduced in GW2 from where they originally where for MMORPGs (instanced content started as raid like content, dungeons were not available in the first MMORPGs to great extent) does not remove the aspect that this party content takes in this game type. Yes, GW2 requires even less players than most other MMORPGs for its instanced content, yet the necessity to organize and cooperate is shared with nearly all other MMORPGs.

    If at all it just paints an even sadder picture of this player base if even with reduced player necessity for instanced content, compared to rival games, players are incapable grouping in order to overcome challenges.

    I like raids, but raids are and were never a core-part or building-block of GW2, they came very late to GW2 and are still niche content and are not a success (thats why Anet made strike missions to get more players into raiding).

    Games with 10-man-instanced content as the main focus are -> way.

    You are missing the point. A central aspect of MMORPGs was, and always has been, the necessity for multiple players to work together to achieve goals.

    Actually, you are missing the point, because this discussion is not about MMORPGs in general, but about GW2.
    GW2 did lots of things different (aka better, at least for the players that came to GW2 because of this, bought the core-game and made GW2 a big success at that time) than "other" MMORPGs and this was/is still the foundation of GW2. And 10-man-instanced content was in the first years not even a part of the original GW2 and its still not the heart of GW2.

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    True, it is about GW2. I made a connection to competitors in the field and past games which established this segment.

    I couldn't care less about those other games.

    That is fine, but you decided to comment on my reference to MMORPGs. Feel free to call GW2 anything you like, but please don't refer to it as a MMORPG then when it has lost all similarities with the genre.

    You do not even remember, that you wrote "This is a MMORPG. Single player games are -> way.". So you referred to GW2 as a MMORPG with that response to me.

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:
    GW2s own vision of player interaction on a massive scale in PVE is (or at least: it was) the open world, where players come together without any gatekeepers or prerequisites, and without any "kill-stealing" and without any hard skill-requirements etc. to achieve common goals (i.e. kill a world boss) as a friendly and cooperative community.

    That is untrue.

    What exactely in my above statement is untrue?

    That this games focus has been on massive scale in PVE in the open world.

    Please read again. That's not what I wrote.

    The thread is about strike missions. Strike Missions are 10-man-instanced content. And I responded to your "MMORPG" reference, and wrote, that 10-man-instanced content is not the "MM" (Massively Multiplayer) from "MMORPG", even if those 10 players needed some form of interaction/communication.

    Then I explained, that GW2s vision of "massively multiplayer" (player interaction on a massive scale) in the game-type "PVE" (I mentioned this, because there is also WvW with massively multiplayer fights/interaction) is the open world.

    Even if it could be true during Season 1, I did not wrote that the focus of the game was on massive scale in PVE in the open world

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    Challenging instanced content was always on the table and was added in form of dungeons and shortly after in form of fractals. You are selective in remembering what this game has and had to offer.

    It looks like you lost track of the discussion. I did not write anything about Dungeons or Fractals in our discussion.

    No, but you referenced challenging instanced content as though it was never intended. Which again, is untrue.

    No, I didn't. Read again. I did also not wrote about "instanced content", "challenging content" or "challenging instanced content" in general. I did however wrote that raids (which I liked/like) and 10-man-instanced content were originally not a part of GW2, came years later and are still not at the core/heart of the game.

    When a forum discussion usually comes to this point/amount of false interpretations/references it is usually a good idea, to just end it. Which I do now from my side. good day.

    https://www.gw2gh.com/ - A GW2-Guild-Hall.
    Register and check your guild leaderboard to see who is the best in your guild and who finished achievements first.

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    The answer to any question related to:
    "How do I get rewards locked behind challenging content?"

    is similar across most any game, it's usually:
    "Get better at the game.

    That would be the correct question and answer, if strike missions would be solo content and not 10-players instanced group content.

    This is a MMORPG. Single player games are -> way.

    "Massively Multiplayer" is only the open world (PvE) and WvW in GW2, 10 players instanced content like strike missions, is not "Massively Multiplayer".

    The fact that instance scaling and player numbers were reduced in GW2 from where they originally where for MMORPGs (instanced content started as raid like content, dungeons were not available in the first MMORPGs to great extent) does not remove the aspect that this party content takes in this game type. Yes, GW2 requires even less players than most other MMORPGs for its instanced content, yet the necessity to organize and cooperate is shared with nearly all other MMORPGs.

    If at all it just paints an even sadder picture of this player base if even with reduced player necessity for instanced content, compared to rival games, players are incapable grouping in order to overcome challenges.

    I like raids, but raids are and were never a core-part or building-block of GW2, they came very late to GW2 and are still niche content and are not a success (thats why Anet made strike missions to get more players into raiding).

    Games with 10-man-instanced content as the main focus are -> way.

    You are missing the point. A central aspect of MMORPGs was, and always has been, the necessity for multiple players to work together to achieve goals.

    Actually, you are missing the point, because this discussion is not about MMORPGs in general, but about GW2.
    GW2 did lots of things different (aka better, at least for the players that came to GW2 because of this, bought the core-game and made GW2 a big success at that time) than "other" MMORPGs and this was/is still the foundation of GW2. And 10-man-instanced content was in the first years not even a part of the original GW2 and its still not the heart of GW2.

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    True, it is about GW2. I made a connection to competitors in the field and past games which established this segment.

    I couldn't care less about those other games.

    That is fine, but you decided to comment on my reference to MMORPGs. Feel free to call GW2 anything you like, but please don't refer to it as a MMORPG then when it has lost all similarities with the genre.

    You do not even remember, that you wrote "This is a MMORPG. Single player games are -> way.". So you referred to GW2 as a MMORPG with that response to me.

    Yes, and I was under the impression that this meant according to what is commonly accepted in MMORPG past and present. I was not aware you intended for the game to change so far it would not fit the MMORPG mold. You were the one arguing the game has changed and is different to competitors and as such further change is in order.

    As such, the game is currently a MMORPG, and that means it shares some characteristics with other industry titles.

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:
    GW2s own vision of player interaction on a massive scale in PVE is (or at least: it was) the open world, where players come together without any gatekeepers or prerequisites, and without any "kill-stealing" and without any hard skill-requirements etc. to achieve common goals (i.e. kill a world boss) as a friendly and cooperative community.

    That is untrue.

    What exactely in my above statement is untrue?

    That this games focus has been on massive scale in PVE in the open world.

    Please read again. That's not what I wrote.

    The thread is about strike missions. Strike Missions are 10-man-instanced content. And I responded to your "MMORPG" reference, and wrote, that 10-man-instanced content is not the "MM" (Massively Multiplayer) from "MMORPG", even if those 10 players needed some form of interaction/communication.

    Then I explained, that GW2s vision of "massively multiplayer" (player interaction on a massive scale) in the game-type "PVE" (I mentioned this, because there is also WvW with massively multiplayer fights/interaction) is the open world.

    Even if it could be true during Season 1, I did not wrote that the focus of the game was on massive scale in PVE in the open world

    and I disagreed that this games focus was solely on open world content. Evident by the existence of instanced content since launch.

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Zok.4956 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    Challenging instanced content was always on the table and was added in form of dungeons and shortly after in form of fractals. You are selective in remembering what this game has and had to offer.

    It looks like you lost track of the discussion. I did not write anything about Dungeons or Fractals in our discussion.

    No, but you referenced challenging instanced content as though it was never intended. Which again, is untrue.

    No, I didn't. Read again. I did also not wrote about "instanced content", "challenging content" or "challenging instanced content" in general. I did however wrote that raids (which I liked/like) and 10-man-instanced content were originally not a part of GW2, came years later and are still not at the core/heart of the game.

    True, yet they have been part of the game longer than the game had been without. Ever since HoT, which makes raid and 10-man instanced content part of this game for 4.5 years, which is more than half its lifespan. On top of which instanced content has been part of this game since launch.

  • Eloc Freidon.5692Eloc Freidon.5692 Member ✭✭✭✭

    The big contradiction of saying that players not wanting to go into instanced content away from the majority of where the multiplayer game is taking place, is somehow the same as them "only wanting to play single player in an MMO".

  • Manasa Devi.7958Manasa Devi.7958 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    You must have misread. He literally states that they should appeal to both communities, and the hardcore or challenging content segment of the player base has been neglected long enough, so they might have to refocus some attention to developing such content. That's hardly making the game raid oriented, it's literally just saying the game should have something besides open world content.

    As far as the "small audience", what ever Arenanet do, they have to focus more on the paying and money spending part of this community, given their latest quarterly report. I'm not going to assume to know if this applies to casual players or more hardcore players. The devs have the metrics on that.

    That "both communities" notion is where this whole thing crashes down without any hope of a satisfying resolution. It's an oversimplification to only account for 2 sentiments with regard to raids, and any attempted solution based on it will just fall short.

  • Eloc Freidon.5692Eloc Freidon.5692 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @mbhalo.1547 said:
    As a normal, pretty casual player i finished meta achievement within a week with relative ease, without any of the strike mission achievements, i think your math is wrong, OP.

    I have every achievement you can get except for the Strike Mission stuff. I'm still six away from completion. I don't think you have the meta achievement done.

  • Neutra.6857Neutra.6857 Member ✭✭✭
    edited February 12, 2020

    The current strike mission is a rather easy one to beat, though I had a bit of an issue with the do not get hit one due to some invisible AOE attack. The CC the bar achieve was very easy though. Last week the boneskinner also had an easy achieve of lighting the torches. That one could be done solo since he would attack the lights even if you did not attack him. All you needed is some sustain. Boneskinner did not need to be killed at ll for that achieve.

  • Dante.1763Dante.1763 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Eloc Freidon.5692 said:

    @mbhalo.1547 said:
    As a normal, pretty casual player i finished meta achievement within a week with relative ease, without any of the strike mission achievements, i think your math is wrong, OP.

    I have every achievement you can get except for the Strike Mission stuff. I'm still six away from completion. I don't think you have the meta achievement done.

    This.

    You can get 30 achievements that count for the meta without doing strikes. The hidden ones dont count, and some of the others in the story journal window do not either.

    Amana Silentchild; My Main
    Ember Wandertooth; The Kingslayer, Kianda Redpaw; The Blazing Light
    Why GW is Called Guildwars

  • mbhalo.1547mbhalo.1547 Member ✭✭✭

    @Eloc Freidon.5692 said:
    I have every achievement you can get except for the Strike Mission stuff. I'm still six away from completion. I don't think you have the meta achievement done.

    This is how my Shadow in the Ice tab looks like - https://i.imgur.com/qIxgPlI.jpg

  • Inculpatus cedo.9234Inculpatus cedo.9234 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 13, 2020

    'Fraenir Frolic' is obtained in a Strike Mission. As is 'Elemental Elegy', and 'High Shaman, High Stakes'.
    'Kodan Dodger' is another. And, 'Reflections in the Ice'. And, 'Vortex, Interrupted'.

    According to the screenshot, you have completed all of those.

  • Eloc Freidon.5692Eloc Freidon.5692 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 13, 2020

    @mbhalo.1547 said:

    This is how my Shadow in the Ice tab looks like - https://i.imgur.com/qIxgPlI.jpg

    It shows you did the Kodan Strike Mission.

  • Ayrilana.1396Ayrilana.1396 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 13, 2020

    The next several days will be a good time to do the strike achievements which should net you an additional four completed. Last night I saw upwards to three groups farming the Sanctifier achievement at the same time.

  • mbhalo.1547mbhalo.1547 Member ✭✭✭

    @Eloc Freidon.5692 said:
    It shows you did the Kodan Strike Mission.

    Yeah but i didn't go for any achievements. So all those achieves completed while doing strikes the normal way, and since they're so easy its within the reach for casuals like me.

  • Infusion.7149Infusion.7149 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 13, 2020

    @Nagiil.1230 said:
    Its easy to say "Get better at the game."

    I arrive at 7pm at home after work ... play with the kids ... dinner ... then I have 1,5 hours for playing.
    Doing dailies, home instance, some APs, key farm, ... and then strike missions.

    My experience with the strikes:
    1st try: waiting ~10 mins for public group .... start, PUG wipe at ~60%
    2nd try, same group: wipe at ~50%, left group
    doing some other thing in GW
    3rd try, waiting für 15min for enough people ... boss ice shard is not there (bug).
    That means 30-45mins for nothing.
    Same thing has repeated for ~4 days and now I have given up strikes.

    (sorry for qqing)

    If you have full berserker gear on any class except necro (which some people discriminate) you can basically set up a LFG and have actual lenient requirements (i.e. one quickness Firebrand/chrono, one optional alacrity renegade/chrono, one optional warrior with banner, one healer of any type if everyone is bad at dodging) instead of joining random clueless people in the public strike.
    i.e.
    power dragonhunter
    power berserker/core warrior tactics , usually double axe but other common weapons aren't horrible such as greatsword or hammer
    power renegade /herald
    power tempest scepter warhorn, power sword weaver
    power soulbeast with greatsword (not longbow...)
    power staff daredevil
    power holosmith
    power chrono/mesmer on sword+focus or sword+sword
    power reaper

    The only time this doesn't hold true is if it's whisper of jormag (need to do mechanics) or the bugged boneskinner.

  • I do not raid and I’ve finished all the strikes with achievements so it’s possible to do with no raid experience at all. It’s best to use LFG. That way I’ve rarely been in parties that failed. Just follow the commanders instructions. Public instance is usually doomed even before it started.

  • Iris Ng.9845Iris Ng.9845 Member ✭✭✭

    I have a systematic method of completing Meta achievement with minimal backtracking everytime. Maybe that would help you as a fellow normie.

    • Do story and check list all the story AP within each instance. They usually amount up to 10 ish singular Achievements.
    • Do one-time scavenger hunts, puzzles, trials, collections while completing map marker quests in between story instances. You can do these tasks solo and that should clear up other 5-10
    • In groups (which can be easily LFG), do the champion hunt, repeat certain event chain or repeat enough Meta event boss kills or daily gate stuffs for other 5-7.
    • Check for all the easy hidden AP, 1-3.
    • At this point, you have a few left to fill. You can decide between grinding out some very repetitive AP (kill hundreds of mob) or finish a weapon collection - the slow solo way, or somewhat challenging quests that require a group effort (SoS in guild chat or LFG) - the uncertain party way.
    • Finally, those peskiest Jumping Puzzle AP or those story APs that requires a lengthy start over if you mess up a tiny bit. Them, yes, I leave them last for a random chance to get helped by professionals.
  • kraai.7265kraai.7265 Member ✭✭✭
    edited February 14, 2020

    @thepenmonster.3621 said:

    @Blude.6812 said:
    And you wonder why some players want nothing to with strikes and raids and are failing to get people to join.

    The people devoted to the side content (raids, fractals, PvP, etc...) being the reason no one else wants to play the side content is the tap-dancing elephant in the room.

    Only problem is pvp and wvw aren't side content, they were actually the main content back in the day, dungeons, fractals and raids weren't intended to be side content neither, actually they were aiming for making them endgame content, the reason you can go around in your braindead open world maps farming stupid generic mobs all day is because when the game launched, with wvw as endgame and a focus on pvp tons of players comitted to this game and supported it, players who had to leave years after because of how anet managed those game modes and their communities.

    Thats the reason why open world farmers are a majority today, because they don't care about the overall quality of the game, they just want to run around spam basic attacks loot kitten, buy cosmetics and look shiny and stylish, meanwhile competitive players do care about combat, balance, challenge, meaningful rpg elements, and when anet failed to deliver that level of quality we experienced at launch, most left to another game that would deliver a better combat experience.

    IMO they are right, they came here before, they supported anet at the most difficult stage which was launch, anet promised them as much focus and effort on pvp elements as in pve, and then anet failed those players, the thing i hate the most is reading pvers who just started playing after hot or pof, who think gw2 was always a loot farming braindead game trying to push those hardocore vets or competitive players away and never recognizing without those hardocore competitive vets they wouldn't have gw2 on the first place.

  • kraai.7265kraai.7265 Member ✭✭✭

    @kratan.4619 said:
    Here you go Anet, a lot of the responses in this thread are exactly why you should totally stop development of instanced content. All it does is breed elitist attitudes.

    Actually i think it's more elitist to pretend every player should enjoy spamming basic attacks and nothing else, with no challenge whatsoever than asking players to step up a bit and learn about the other 9 buttons they have on their skill bar, after all this is supposed to be a "action" combat mmorpg, not a braindead android mmo with autoplay
    The problem is gw2 players today prefer the shopping mall experience, and the fashion wars, but care little to nothing about the combat, which at launch was the strongest selling point they had. And it was actually great until they butchered it with hot and pof specs. And now you have to forces clashing, the veterans who supported this game because they loved the combat mechanics, the challenges, and the interesting game modes, and the new or more casual audience who enjoy repetitive dull braindead content over and over agian to farm currency or kitten or get money for shinys.

  • kraai.7265kraai.7265 Member ✭✭✭

    @Nagiil.1230 said:
    Its easy to say "Get better at the game."

    I arrive at 7pm at home after work ... play with the kids ... dinner ... then I have 1,5 hours for playing.
    Doing dailies, home instance, some APs, key farm, ... and then strike missions.

    My experience with the strikes:
    1st try: waiting ~10 mins for public group .... start, PUG wipe at ~60%
    2nd try, same group: wipe at ~50%, left group
    doing some other thing in GW
    3rd try, waiting für 15min for enough people ... boss ice shard is not there (bug).
    That means 30-45mins for nothing.
    Same thing has repeated for ~4 days and now I have given up strikes.

    (sorry for qqing)

    Well thats actually one of the biggest problems anet faces right now, they deliver such an easy and braindead content in open world maps and events, most players reach level 80 without even knowing how their entire skillbar works, or how to build a character, then they are dragged to this "difficult" content without knowing the basics of their own class, thats why when they released hot i thought they did a great job, making it way harder than core maps, because it was a slight step up in everyones game, but guess what, casuals cried enough so anet nerfed the entire expansion to make it easier, and now they can't even throw a little bit of challenge because playerbase already knows the best solution
    welcome to cry wars 2.....