Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Including Strike Mission Achievements as a Required Part of the Zone Meta


Vayne.8563

Recommended Posts

@Randulf.7614 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sir Vincent III.1286 said:

@Sir Vincent III.1286 said:Casual players don't care about achievements. So the achievement requirements means literally nothing to casuals. If the player cares about it, then they are not casual players.

Just saying.

Sorry but people who identify as casuals often do care about achievements. I have a guild full of them. So I guess the question is, why is your definition of casuals better than theirs? I mean we can sit and discuss the definition of casuals I suppose but I'd make a thread to do this. I'm a person who always gets the meta, but I'm not a huge fan of getting together with 9 other players, organized or not. It's why I don't raid. Not because I'm not good enough to raid, but becaue it's not a casual activity. I engage, generally in more casual, pick up and play activities. This isn't one of them.

I agree with everything you said. Casual is pick up and play activities.

Achievements requires work, that's not a casual pick up and play activity.

We're not in disagreement on what casual is. I disagree on the notion that Achievements are designed for casual players or should be designed to include casual activities. They are not and should not.

Achievements in this game have always been little more than "Hey you did a thing." thats why they are given for walking into areas on maps, killing creatures etc.

Meta achievements have always been obtainable by -everyone- casuals and hardcore players alike, and they should remain as such. You can disagree as much as you want, but the vast majority of achievements can be obtained with little to no effort, especially the ones related to the story. This Meta is the first one in the entire game since they started doing metas that requires this sort of content, to which i disagree.

Had it been that way from the very start i would agree with you, but it hasnt for the last 7 almost 8 years and changing the game this late wont be healthy IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

There are multiple reasons people don't raid....difficulty is only one of them. I don't raid for other reasons. The difficulty I can handle just fine.

Correct. Anet are focusing on the difficulty one because that is the one they apparently have the most feedback about. We can back and forth what we believe are the obstacles to raiding, but Anet are far better positioned to know what the main obstacle is given they see a vastly greater amount of feedback than any of us can ever claim to see on just forums or reddit.

But, I'll stop there since I am contributing to pulling this thread off course

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Randulf.7614 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

There are multiple reasons people don't raid....difficulty is only one of them. I don't raid for other reasons. The difficulty I can handle just fine.

Correct. Anet are focusing on the difficulty one because that is the one they apparently have the most feedback about. We can back and forth what we believe are the obstacles to raiding, but Anet are far better positioned to know what the main obstacle is given they see a vastly greater amount of feedback than any of us can ever claim to see on just forums or reddit.

But, I'll stop there since I am contributing to pulling this thread off course

And players said the exact same stuff when raids were launched, and here we are 5 years later... “the small audience they attract”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Swagger.1459 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

@Fire Attunement.9835 said:We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Randulf.7614 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

@Fire Attunement.9835 said:We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Iris Ng.9845 said:~snip~They are simply players who spend less than 4 hours a day playing various contents out of habit. ~snip~

Stop right there, that's your opinion of what a casual is, what's to say that person who plays 8 hours a day isn't casual? It's not time based, it's ease of play based entirely in my OPINION, absolutely nothing to do with time at all. It's the ability to come and go as you please and not get left behind, it's what ever each individual person determines it to be for them. I've personally done the Grothmar strike mission once, and that's the one and only time I've done one, it has nothing to do with the difficulty at all, same with Raids, but it does come down to wanting to play the game how I want with the build I want and not some Meta build or what others want me to play. I'm playing the game for my enjoyment and if I have to do something other than what I enjoy then I just won't do the content and I'll ignore the Meta achievements as well. I don't have many of them but I'm probably in the middle of the pack with 18k AP(probably 2/3 thanks to the dailies, even having taken off about 2 years in total).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Swagger.1459 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

@Fire Attunement.9835 said:We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Randulf.7614 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

@"Fire Attunement.9835" said:We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Swagger.1459 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

@"Fire Attunement.9835" said:We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Randulf.7614 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

@"Fire Attunement.9835" said:We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

That's great, you are entitled to feel the way you feel. Just be aware that forcing strike missions on players will backfire and not grow raid participation, and we don't need metrics on what we already know from past experiences.

Edit- And out of curiosity, do you run spvp MATs or seasons?

Edit 2- So now is the time to annoy casual players who hate raid type content? Right?

..."Not exactly positive. Less funds mean less content. And given the reduction in both quantity and quality per episode, it doesn't bode well for what is to come.There's also a case for what more is there people want to buy 8 years on? Especially given things are only in the store for a brief period then removed for a long while."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

@"Fire Attunement.9835" said:We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

That's great, you are entitled to feel the way you feel. Just be aware that forcing strike missions on players will backfire and not grow raid participation, and we don't need metrics on what we already know from past experiences.

Edit- And out of curiosity, do you run spvp MATs or seasons?

@Randulf.7614 said:Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

@"Fire Attunement.9835" said:We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

That's great, you are entitled to feel the way you feel. Just be aware that forcing strike missions on players will backfire and not grow raid participation, and we don't need metrics on what we already know from past experiences.

Edit- And out of curiosity, do you run spvp MATs or seasons?

I can't see it backfire. Before there were raiders and non-raiders only.Now there are raiders and non-raiders and players who do strikes but not raids.I'm sure some who never raided will try raids after strikes but someone who won't even do strikes when some are easy were never gonna do raids anyway.The only question is will players quit because they couldn't do one meta because they refuse to do strikes I mean maybe but doubt it will be a mass exodus. Now if they continue next meta with and added strikes being even harder it could chase some away

I don't think players quit for one reason. But players accumulate reasons until they quit. For me this is a big one. I really don't want to play and I'm not going to play as much. I'm certainly not feeling like spending money in the gem store. I might not quit but it will affect my hours in game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

@"Fire Attunement.9835" said:We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

That's great, you are entitled to feel the way you feel. Just be aware that forcing strike missions on players will backfire and not grow raid participation, and we don't need metrics on what we already know from past experiences.

Edit- And out of curiosity, do you run spvp MATs or seasons?

@Randulf.7614 said:Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

@"Fire Attunement.9835" said:We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

That's great, you are entitled to feel the way you feel. Just be aware that forcing strike missions on players will backfire and not grow raid participation, and we don't need metrics on what we already know from past experiences.

Edit- And out of curiosity, do you run spvp MATs or seasons?

I can't see it backfire. Before there were raiders and non-raiders only.Now there are raiders and non-raiders and players who do strikes but not raids.I'm sure some who never raided will try raids after strikes but someone who won't even do strikes when some are easy were never gonna do raids anyway.The only question is will players quit because they couldn't do one meta because they refuse to do strikes I mean maybe but doubt it will be a mass exodus. Now if they continue next meta with and added strikes being even harder it could chase some away

I don't think players quit for one reason. But players accumulate reasons until they quit. For me this is a big one. I really don't want to play and I'm not going to play as much. I'm certainly not feeling like spending money in the gem store. I might not quit but it will affect my hours in game.

Yup

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all of those that don't like having to do strike mission achievements for the meta: have you actually done strikes and put as much effort into them as you would have done for any story or open world achievement? I have a suspicion that a lot of those that don't like it probably have never actually done strikes or at least put much effort into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ayrilana.1396 said:For all of those that don't like having to do strike mission achievements for the meta: have you actually done strikes and put as much effort into them as you would have done for any story or open world achievement? I have a suspicion that a lot of those that don't like it probably have never actually done strikes or at least put much effort into it.

Doesn’t matter. The strike mission requirements should be removed from the completion equation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ayrilana.1396 said:For all of those that don't like having to do strike mission achievements for the meta: have you actually done strikes and put as much effort into them as you would have done for any story or open world achievement? I have a suspicion that a lot of those that don't like it probably have never actually done strikes or at least put much effort into it.

I have, thanks. I have found through the first 4 that i dont like or enjoy them, with friends or guildies or even public they arent content i enjoy or want to participate in. Outside of being unable to quickly respond to the mechanics they arent fun for me.

Tried Whisper again tonight with a friend and his guild mates for the final achievement i needed for the Shiver emote, it was stressful, frustrating, irritating and a waste of 2 hours. Thankfully i got the achievement for not getting hit by his attacks(cause i died at 75%), but we never got lower than 30% and now that i have the meta i wont be doing strikes anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Swagger.1459 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:For all of those that don't like having to do strike mission achievements for the meta: have you actually done strikes
and
put as much effort into them as you would have done for any story or open world achievement? I have a suspicion that a lot of those that don't like it probably have never actually done strikes or at least put much effort into it.

Doesn’t matter. The strike mission requirements should be removed from the completion equation.

Based on what? That you don't like them? I didn't particularly enjoy grinding events so those should be removed too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Blocki.4931 said:Every way that gets people to do parts of the game they wouldn't otherwise check out is worth it. If any minor inconvenience drives them away from achieving their goal of completing a meta achievement then I must ask why they wanted to do it in the first place.

Up to a point.

WVW: im forced into this to obtain the gift of battle when im working on legendarys, i dont like WVW but i can flip camps for the GOB. Otherwise i dont go set foot therePVP: i dont enjoy at all, i dont set foot there.Dungeons: No need to go into them, i have all the items.Fractals: Only run these maybe once or twice a month when my friend gets on, otherwise i dont set foot there as i dont enjoy them.Raids: Only run these maybe once or twice a -year- when my friend has a spare room in his pre made, and feels like taking me along. Would never touch otherwise.Strikes: only for the achievements if required. Dont enjoy them otherwise.

Once one has tried the content once or even a few times they will be able to know if they enjoy the content. Again, metas have never forced players into instanced content, not in 7 years. Instanced content has been kept out of them so -everyone- including the ultra casuals and the hard core raiders could obtain them.

Past making them do it once, all its going to do is force players into content they dont want to do which creates a toxic mixing pool of player types.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Blocki.4931 said:Every way that gets people to do parts of the game they wouldn't otherwise check out is worth it. If any minor inconvenience drives them away from achieving their goal of completing a meta achievement then I must ask why they wanted to do it in the first place.

Is it worth it if you piss off more players than move on to the point where they don't want to play? That's the real question here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:For all of those that don't like having to do strike mission achievements for the meta: have you actually done strikes
and
put as much effort into them as you would have done for any story or open world achievement? I have a suspicion that a lot of those that don't like it probably have never actually done strikes or at least put much effort into it.

Doesn’t matter. The strike mission requirements should be removed from the completion equation.

Based on what? That you don't like them? I didn't particularly enjoy grinding events so those should be removed too.

Refer back to my other posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:For all of those that don't like having to do strike mission achievements for the meta: have you actually done strikes
and
put as much effort into them as you would have done for any story or open world achievement? I have a suspicion that a lot of those that don't like it probably have never actually done strikes or at least put much effort into it.

Doesn’t matter. The strike mission requirements should be removed from the completion equation.

Based on what? That you don't like them? I didn't particularly enjoy grinding events so those should be removed too.

As I've said numerous times, it's not the strike missions that's the problem, it's the change. Do you remember how the personal story had to be changed from a dungeon to a solo instance because people complained? The same thing happened to me in Rift. THe main story line ended in a raid. I didn't want to raid and it was one of the main things that drove me from that game. I suppose I should be thankful on that count.

But if you want to raise the bar, in my opinion, this isn't the way to do it. It's long been a problem with the nature of open world PvE being so casual in this game. You change the game you lose the playerbase. It's just logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

@"Fire Attunement.9835" said:We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

That's great, you are entitled to feel the way you feel. Just be aware that forcing strike missions on players will backfire and not grow raid participation, and we don't need metrics on what we already know from past experiences.

Edit- And out of curiosity, do you run spvp MATs or seasons?

@Randulf.7614 said:Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

@"Fire Attunement.9835" said:We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

That's great, you are entitled to feel the way you feel. Just be aware that forcing strike missions on players will backfire and not grow raid participation, and we don't need metrics on what we already know from past experiences.

Edit- And out of curiosity, do you run spvp MATs or seasons?

I can't see it backfire. Before there were raiders and non-raiders only.Now there are raiders and non-raiders and players who do strikes but not raids.I'm sure some who never raided will try raids after strikes but someone who won't even do strikes when some are easy were never gonna do raids anyway.The only question is will players quit because they couldn't do one meta because they refuse to do strikes I mean maybe but doubt it will be a mass exodus. Now if they continue next meta with and added strikes being even harder it could chase some away

I don't think players quit for one reason. But players accumulate reasons until they quit. For me this is a big one. I really don't want to play and I'm not going to play as much. I'm certainly not feeling like spending money in the gem store. I might not quit but it will affect my hours in game.

And that's your choice. I avoided jumping puzzles forever then over time I did almost them all. Still not a fan. The light puzzles I had no interest but this meta kinda made me do um. Stikes are similar. I don't look forward to new ones but It's just a world boss with a 10 player cap. You join and even if you suck most times the 8 left alive kill it esp groth kodan and fraenir. It's not like after I'm like omg that Vayne dude sucked and send you whispers. You try if you like it great if not do the bare minimum beat um each once or ignore a meta which isn't the end of the world. Up to you but I say at least try.

Sure it's my choice. I agree. But it's not JUST my choice. It's everyone's choice. And if enough people are affected by that choice it will affect the game negatively. There's one group of players less pissed off than other players. I suggest it's probably not the group of players you'd want to alienate. Just my thought process. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe none of the casual players left in the game care enough about the meta to be frustrated...but I don't think that's the case.

Saying this is my choice is absolutely true. Suggesting that I"m some how alone in my feelings on this probably isn't. Whether this is a good idea or not will depend on the size of that demographic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Swagger.1459 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:For all of those that don't like having to do strike mission achievements for the meta: have you actually done strikes
and
put as much effort into them as you would have done for any story or open world achievement? I have a suspicion that a lot of those that don't like it probably have never actually done strikes or at least put much effort into it.

Doesn’t matter. The strike mission requirements should be removed from the completion equation.

Based on what? That you don't like them? I didn't particularly enjoy grinding events so those should be removed too.

Refer back to my other posts.

You don't like them because you feel that they're like raids which only the most recent one is relatively close to that.

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:For all of those that don't like having to do strike mission achievements for the meta: have you actually done strikes
and
put as much effort into them as you would have done for any story or open world achievement? I have a suspicion that a lot of those that don't like it probably have never actually done strikes or at least put much effort into it.

Doesn’t matter. The strike mission requirements should be removed from the completion equation.

Based on what? That you don't like them? I didn't particularly enjoy grinding events so those should be removed too.

As I've said numerous times, it's not the strike missions that's the problem, it's the change. Do you remember how the personal story had to be changed from a dungeon to a solo instance because people complained? The same thing happened to me in Rift. THe main story line ended in a raid. I didn't want to raid and it was one of the main things that drove me from that game. I suppose I should be thankful on that count.

But if you want to raise the bar, in my opinion, this isn't the way to do it. It's long been a problem with the nature of open world PvE being so casual in this game. You change the game you lose the playerbase. It's just logic.

So it's the change. So you had no issue when the Arah dungeon story was changed to be done solo but you have an issue when they added strike missions with this season and not doing some of the strike achievements is required for the meta? It seems as if you only dislike change if it goes against what you want.

The game isn't being changed by adding strike missions. It's not being changed by having strike mission achievements being included towards an episode's meta achievement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...