Jump to content
  • Sign Up

STORY MODE FOR RAIDS

Kaizer.8261

By Kaizer.8261
in Instanced Group Content

 Share

Recommended Posts

Amaranthe.3578

Amaranthe.3578

Posted
Posted

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Epsilon Indi.2031
Epsilon Indi.2031

While I agree with your premise, OP, I believe a better solution would be an 'easy mode' of sorts inspired by Fractals. Something along the lines of weekly repeatable T1/2/3/4/CM Raids with scaled rew

Raknar.4735

Raknar.4735

Posted
Posted

@Amaranthe.3578 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

I've also seen plenty of people that claim that raids are unfun and that it has nothing to do with challenge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Amaranthe.3578

Amaranthe.3578

Posted
Posted

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

I've also seen plenty of people that claim that raids are unfun and that it has nothing to do with challenge.

Maybe, but the vast majority of complaints seem to be that they are too hard and that your average raider is a dickens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raknar.4735

Raknar.4735

Posted
Posted

@Amaranthe.3578 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

I've also seen plenty of people that claim that raids are unfun and that it has nothing to do with challenge.

Maybe, but the vast majority of complaints seem to be that they are too hard and that your average raider is a dickens.

It's easier to just say "raids are too hard", instead of stating the same reasons over and over again. People are tired of not being listened to.If the raids were easier they wouldn't have to waste their time with all the grouping, dance routines and other stuff. They'd not have to use their time for stuff they dislike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eramonster.2718

Eramonster.2718

Posted
Posted

"No please. The Classic experience required community building that LFR sidesteps. Things like LFR helped kill the social engineering that was part of playing in the Classic era."

Text is from elsewhere, but the "community building" rings. Is LFR implemented WoW classic?

The need for "guild/community" is weak in GW2 (Rp, Raids, WvW etc). There's just this feeling fighting alongside a guild/community, eg. in WVW, even if you're not part of their guild members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyninja.2954

Cyninja.2954

Posted
Posted

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

I've also seen plenty of people that claim that raids are unfun and that it has nothing to do with challenge.

Maybe, but the vast majority of complaints seem to be that they are too hard and that your average raider is a dickens.

It's easier to just say "raids are too hard", instead of stating the same reasons over and over again. People are tired of not being listened to.If the raids were easier they wouldn't have to waste their time with all the grouping, dance routines and other stuff. They'd not have to use their time for stuff they dislike.

You're assuming in order to make a point. That's never a good basis for arguments, especially if you assume other players positions. It's better to go by what was said, which supports the thesis that players feel raids are to hard, than assume something else was ment (which very well might be the case occasionally). Even this thread creator articulates why he wants an easier version of raids.

The metrics of player performance disparity also favor the reasoning that raids might be very or to challenging for many players.

I could turn your argument around and say:"Well if people do not succeed at things, they are more likely to perceive those things as unfun. As such enabling more players to be able to succeed at raids would solve the issue (which in turn can be done via different methods)." That statement would be far more supported by the current metrics and past threads on this topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raknar.4735

Raknar.4735

Posted
Posted

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

I've also seen plenty of people that claim that raids are unfun and that it has nothing to do with challenge.

Maybe, but the vast majority of complaints seem to be that they are too hard and that your average raider is a dickens.

It's easier to just say "raids are too hard", instead of stating the same reasons over and over again. People are tired of not being listened to.If the raids were easier they wouldn't have to waste their time with all the grouping, dance routines and other stuff. They'd not have to use their time for stuff they dislike.

You're assuming in order to make a point. That's never a good basis for arguments, especially if you assume other players positions. It's better to go by what was said, which supports the thesis that players feel raids are to hard, than assume something else was ment (which very well might be the case occasionally). Even this thread creator articulates why he wants an easier version of raids.

The metrics of player performance disparity also favor the reasoning that raids might be very or to challenging for many players.

I could turn your argument around and say:"Well if people do not succeed at things, they are more likely to perceive those things as unfun. As such enabling more players to be able to succeed at raids would solve the issue (which in turn can be done via different methods)." That statement would be far more supported by the current metrics and past threads on this topic.

There have been plenty of people stating that they don't do raids, not because of their difficulty, but for other reasons. Ignoring that fact is also not a good basis for arguments. The thread creator doesn't actually want "easier" versions of raids, he wants a mode in which he can experience the story. As he stated, it should be for "smaller and/or less skilled groups", it could also be a single player story instance, which would be far from the easy mode raids you're assuming he wants.

if people do not succeed at things, they are more likely to perceive those things as unfun.

You don't even have to turn my argument, that's just normal. In fact, it doesn't even have anything to do with my argument, as succeeding at raids was never part of my argument in the first place.Enabling more players to succeed at raids would make them more tolerable and less time wasting for people that inherently don't have fun playing that type of content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astralporing.1957

Astralporing.1957

Posted
Posted

@Amaranthe.3578 said:

@"Raknar.4735" said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game.I don't remember them ever saying that. One of the devs working on those said (well after he was no longer working for Blizzard, by the way) that he, personally, regretted doing them, that's all. And even then he didn't actually say that LFR was bad for the game or that it wasn't needed. The thing he regretted was only the way that specific implementation "cheapened" the raiding and made raids feel "less elite".

Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players.No, it's a consensus among a very small, (but also very vocal) subset of players. Or, to be more precise, it's a meme. One that is not even necessarily true even for that small part of WoW community. It's just easier to blame everything on LFR, than try to make an in-depth analysis of WoW raiding and notice a ton of other problems that caused negative impact on it. And it's definitely easier to blame LFR than admit that a lot of problems Raids have are inherent to the content and a natural consequence of base raid design (say, like admitting that people that actually like the original concept of raids are a relatively small minority).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyninja.2954

Cyninja.2954

Posted
Posted

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

I've also seen plenty of people that claim that raids are unfun and that it has nothing to do with challenge.

Maybe, but the vast majority of complaints seem to be that they are too hard and that your average raider is a dickens.

It's easier to just say "raids are too hard", instead of stating the same reasons over and over again. People are tired of not being listened to.If the raids were easier they wouldn't have to waste their time with all the grouping, dance routines and other stuff. They'd not have to use their time for stuff they dislike.

You're assuming in order to make a point. That's never a good basis for arguments, especially if you assume other players positions. It's better to go by what was said, which supports the thesis that players feel raids are to hard, than assume something else was ment (which very well might be the case occasionally). Even this thread creator articulates why he wants an easier version of raids.

The metrics of player performance disparity also favor the reasoning that raids might be very or to challenging for many players.

I could turn your argument around and say:"Well if people do not succeed at things, they are more likely to perceive those things as unfun. As such enabling more players to be able to succeed at raids would solve the issue (which in turn can be done via different methods)." That statement would be far more supported by the current metrics and past threads on this topic.

There have been plenty of people stating that they don't do raids, not because of their difficulty, but for other reasons. Ignoring that fact is also not a good basis for arguments. The thread creator doesn't actually want "easier" versions of raids, he wants a mode in which he can experience the story. As he stated, it should be for "smaller and/or less skilled groups", it could also be a single player story instance, which would be far from the easy mode raids you're assuming he wants.

I never put that in question. What I am questioning is that these players make up a majority. Again, the metrics of performance disparity would not support this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raknar.4735

Raknar.4735

Posted
Posted

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

I've also seen plenty of people that claim that raids are unfun and that it has nothing to do with challenge.

Maybe, but the vast majority of complaints seem to be that they are too hard and that your average raider is a dickens.

It's easier to just say "raids are too hard", instead of stating the same reasons over and over again. People are tired of not being listened to.If the raids were easier they wouldn't have to waste their time with all the grouping, dance routines and other stuff. They'd not have to use their time for stuff they dislike.

You're assuming in order to make a point. That's never a good basis for arguments, especially if you assume other players positions. It's better to go by what was said, which supports the thesis that players feel raids are to hard, than assume something else was ment (which very well might be the case occasionally). Even this thread creator articulates why he wants an easier version of raids.

The metrics of player performance disparity also favor the reasoning that raids might be very or to challenging for many players.

I could turn your argument around and say:"Well if people do not succeed at things, they are more likely to perceive those things as unfun. As such enabling more players to be able to succeed at raids would solve the issue (which in turn can be done via different methods)." That statement would be far more supported by the current metrics and past threads on this topic.

There have been plenty of people stating that they don't do raids, not because of their difficulty, but for other reasons. Ignoring that fact is also not a good basis for arguments. The thread creator doesn't actually want "easier" versions of raids, he wants a mode in which he can experience the story. As he stated, it should be for "smaller and/or less skilled groups", it could also be a single player story instance, which would be far from the easy mode raids you're assuming he wants.

I never put that in question. What I am questioning is that these players make up a majority. Again, the metrics of performance disparity would not support this.

Even if they were a majority, I've never stated they are.If you mean the 10x dps difference stated by Anet by "metrics of performance disparity", they never actually elaborated on those stats. Did they compare them under the same conditions, so a full buffed raid situation? Did they just take an average of non-buffed people with bad gear/traits and a fully optimized person? You'd have to make some assumptions to use that argument, never a good basis for arguments ;)

Also linking "performance" of players to "difficulty of content" is a stretch, since it would only be subjective. You also have to separate actual raid difficulty and the difficulty of the "preparation".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyninja.2954

Cyninja.2954

Posted
Posted

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

I've also seen plenty of people that claim that raids are unfun and that it has nothing to do with challenge.

Maybe, but the vast majority of complaints seem to be that they are too hard and that your average raider is a dickens.

It's easier to just say "raids are too hard", instead of stating the same reasons over and over again. People are tired of not being listened to.If the raids were easier they wouldn't have to waste their time with all the grouping, dance routines and other stuff. They'd not have to use their time for stuff they dislike.

You're assuming in order to make a point. That's never a good basis for arguments, especially if you assume other players positions. It's better to go by what was said, which supports the thesis that players feel raids are to hard, than assume something else was ment (which very well might be the case occasionally). Even this thread creator articulates why he wants an easier version of raids.

The metrics of player performance disparity also favor the reasoning that raids might be very or to challenging for many players.

I could turn your argument around and say:"Well if people do not succeed at things, they are more likely to perceive those things as unfun. As such enabling more players to be able to succeed at raids would solve the issue (which in turn can be done via different methods)." That statement would be far more supported by the current metrics and past threads on this topic.

There have been plenty of people stating that they don't do raids, not because of their difficulty, but for other reasons. Ignoring that fact is also not a good basis for arguments. The thread creator doesn't actually want "easier" versions of raids, he wants a mode in which he can experience the story. As he stated, it should be for "smaller and/or less skilled groups", it could also be a single player story instance, which would be far from the easy mode raids you're assuming he wants.

I never put that in question. What I am questioning is that these players make up a majority. Again, the metrics of performance disparity would not support this.

Even if they were a majority, I've never stated they are.If you mean the 10x dps difference stated by Anet by "metrics of performance disparity", they never actually elaborated on those stats. Did they compare them under the same conditions, so a full buffed raid situation? Did they just take an average of non-buffed people with bad gear/traits and a fully optimized person? You'd have to make some assumptions to use that argument, never a good basis for arguments ;)

The question is, how much of a stretch is made when assuming.

There are also other metrics available, for example gw2raidar gives an overview of how the highest and lowest performance groups, who are still successful, have performed. The disparity here is also huge.

@Raknar.4735 said:Also linking "performance" of players to "difficulty of content" is a stretch, since it would only be subjective. You also have to separate actual raid difficulty and the difficulty of the "preparation".

True, but this is not about objective content difficulty, since that is actually quite easily measured: you look at what is achievable in the system, then measure that against what is needed to succeed in the content. You can look at different factors like damage, healing, actions per minute, etc. then draw a conclusion. Raids are not to difficult given those criteria.

As to preparation, same reasoning applies: obviously gathering 10 players will be more difficult than going at something solo. Given this number and comparing it to industry standards, again raids are not hard in GW2.

All I'm saying is:This recently established believe which has appeared as argument on the forums that content is not to difficult, but rather players simply assume they are able to perform well enough but decide not to, is not reflected in objective numbers present. It might be applicable to some players, but the harsh reality is rather: a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

It's fine to not want to play the content. It's not fine to ASSUME one is good enough in said content without having ANY metrics or basis for this assumption. That's plain arrogance. If a player has successfully raided and decided to not continue the content due to lack of enjoyment: more power to them. If a player has not successfully raided (for which ever reason, even not wanting to raid is fine) or even done some basic skill analysis (like some simple rotations at the golem), it be best for those player to not assume their own level of skill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raknar.4735

Raknar.4735

Posted
Posted

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

I've also seen plenty of people that claim that raids are unfun and that it has nothing to do with challenge.

Maybe, but the vast majority of complaints seem to be that they are too hard and that your average raider is a dickens.

It's easier to just say "raids are too hard", instead of stating the same reasons over and over again. People are tired of not being listened to.If the raids were easier they wouldn't have to waste their time with all the grouping, dance routines and other stuff. They'd not have to use their time for stuff they dislike.

You're assuming in order to make a point. That's never a good basis for arguments, especially if you assume other players positions. It's better to go by what was said, which supports the thesis that players feel raids are to hard, than assume something else was ment (which very well might be the case occasionally). Even this thread creator articulates why he wants an easier version of raids.

The metrics of player performance disparity also favor the reasoning that raids might be very or to challenging for many players.

I could turn your argument around and say:"Well if people do not succeed at things, they are more likely to perceive those things as unfun. As such enabling more players to be able to succeed at raids would solve the issue (which in turn can be done via different methods)." That statement would be far more supported by the current metrics and past threads on this topic.

There have been plenty of people stating that they don't do raids, not because of their difficulty, but for other reasons. Ignoring that fact is also not a good basis for arguments. The thread creator doesn't actually want "easier" versions of raids, he wants a mode in which he can experience the story. As he stated, it should be for "smaller and/or less skilled groups", it could also be a single player story instance, which would be far from the easy mode raids you're assuming he wants.

I never put that in question. What I am questioning is that these players make up a majority. Again, the metrics of performance disparity would not support this.

Even if they were a majority, I've never stated they are.If you mean the 10x dps difference stated by Anet by "metrics of performance disparity", they never actually elaborated on those stats. Did they compare them under the same conditions, so a full buffed raid situation? Did they just take an average of non-buffed people with bad gear/traits and a fully optimized person? You'd have to make some assumptions to use that argument, never a good basis for arguments ;)

The question is, how much of a stretch is made when assuming.

There are also other metrics available, for example gw2raidar gives an overview of how the highest and lowest performance groups, who are still successful, have performed. The disparity here is also huge.

@Raknar.4735 said:Also linking "performance" of players to "difficulty of content" is a stretch, since it would only be subjective. You also have to separate actual raid difficulty and the difficulty of the "preparation".

True, but this is not about objective content difficulty, since that is actually quite easily measured: you look at what is achievable in the system, then measure that against what is needed to succeed in the content. You can look at different factors like damage, healing, actions per minute, etc. then draw a conclusion. Raids are not to difficult given those criteria.

As to preparation, same reasoning applies: obviously gathering 10 players will be more difficult than going at something solo. Given this number and comparing it to industry standards, again raids are not hard in GW2.

All I'm saying is:This recently established believe which has appeared as argument on the forums that content is not to difficult, but rather players simply assume they are able to perform well enough but decide not to, is not reflected in objective numbers present. It might be applicable to some players, but the harsh reality is rather: a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

It's fine to not want to play the content. It;s not fine to ASSUME one is good enough in said content without having ANY metrics or basis for this assumption. That's plain arrogance.

So you're just assuming that players that follow that belief never played that kind of content. That's a huge assumption. You're also assuming that it is only a recent belief, which it isn't. You're making huge stretches without having any metrics. Your "harsh reality" about the players against the current raids is based on your own assumptions, not an actual reality.The only actual harsh reality, which we can base on Anets' metrics is that raids have a lacking playerbase. Anet came to the conclusion it is due to difficulty, but they also state that if SMs don't "work out" (A hint of uncertainty? Could it be that they don't believe that SMs were the right decision?) they'll have to find another way.

The disparity between low-end groups and high end-groups doesn't matter, since, like you said yourself, the low-end groups are doing the content succesfully. So if the disparity there is huge, the "casual -> low-end disparity" is the one that matters, not the 10x disparity from "casual --> high-end" that anet mentioned.

Comparing GW2 group system to industry standard makes it clear that GW2's system is complicated, not easier.Instead of the prevalent Holy Trinity of Tank/Heal/DPS many people are familiar with, GW2 is more about boon-uptime/Heal/DPS.The boonsystem and boon-uptime play a huge role in GW2. Active group buffs are most of the time scarce in other raiding MMORPGs (WoW e.g. has heroism/bloodrage as a group buff, but other active buffs are limited to oneself. Passive Buffs/Prebuffing is prevalent in other MMORPGs) GW2's group compositions are based around the boon uptime. This is in no way industry standard. It doesn't matter what class the Tank/Heal/DPS are in other MMORPGs most of the time, aside from World First attempts.

I can only speak for myself, since I've played raids and strike missions successfully. The content still is not in any way fun to me after having played it. It is nothing more than a dance routine. This has nothing to do with difficulty, but the content itself. This isn't based on assumptions, but my own perspective while playing the content.

As for the mentality of raiding groups: I've noticed GW2s' raiding scene has an extreme case of gatekeeping compared to other raiding MMOs (WoW, FFXIV). There are many individuals that look down on any non raiders. Your own quotes/assumptions would be a perfect example:

a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

It's fine to not want to play the content. It;s not fine to ASSUME one is good enough in said content without having ANY metrics or basis for this assumption. That's plain arrogance.

Just assumptions about other players that dislike the content you like. Saying they aren't "good enough" for your content, also assuming they have never played the content. Your "objective" numbers seem to be handpicked numbers at best, I haven't seen any actual statistics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyninja.2954

Cyninja.2954

Posted
Posted

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

I've also seen plenty of people that claim that raids are unfun and that it has nothing to do with challenge.

Maybe, but the vast majority of complaints seem to be that they are too hard and that your average raider is a dickens.

It's easier to just say "raids are too hard", instead of stating the same reasons over and over again. People are tired of not being listened to.If the raids were easier they wouldn't have to waste their time with all the grouping, dance routines and other stuff. They'd not have to use their time for stuff they dislike.

You're assuming in order to make a point. That's never a good basis for arguments, especially if you assume other players positions. It's better to go by what was said, which supports the thesis that players feel raids are to hard, than assume something else was ment (which very well might be the case occasionally). Even this thread creator articulates why he wants an easier version of raids.

The metrics of player performance disparity also favor the reasoning that raids might be very or to challenging for many players.

I could turn your argument around and say:"Well if people do not succeed at things, they are more likely to perceive those things as unfun. As such enabling more players to be able to succeed at raids would solve the issue (which in turn can be done via different methods)." That statement would be far more supported by the current metrics and past threads on this topic.

There have been plenty of people stating that they don't do raids, not because of their difficulty, but for other reasons. Ignoring that fact is also not a good basis for arguments. The thread creator doesn't actually want "easier" versions of raids, he wants a mode in which he can experience the story. As he stated, it should be for "smaller and/or less skilled groups", it could also be a single player story instance, which would be far from the easy mode raids you're assuming he wants.

I never put that in question. What I am questioning is that these players make up a majority. Again, the metrics of performance disparity would not support this.

Even if they were a majority, I've never stated they are.If you mean the 10x dps difference stated by Anet by "metrics of performance disparity", they never actually elaborated on those stats. Did they compare them under the same conditions, so a full buffed raid situation? Did they just take an average of non-buffed people with bad gear/traits and a fully optimized person? You'd have to make some assumptions to use that argument, never a good basis for arguments ;)

The question is, how much of a stretch is made when assuming.

There are also other metrics available, for example gw2raidar gives an overview of how the highest and lowest performance groups, who are still successful, have performed. The disparity here is also huge.

@Raknar.4735 said:Also linking "performance" of players to "difficulty of content" is a stretch, since it would only be subjective. You also have to separate actual raid difficulty and the difficulty of the "preparation".

True, but this is not about objective content difficulty, since that is actually quite easily measured: you look at what is achievable in the system, then measure that against what is needed to succeed in the content. You can look at different factors like damage, healing, actions per minute, etc. then draw a conclusion. Raids are not to difficult given those criteria.

As to preparation, same reasoning applies: obviously gathering 10 players will be more difficult than going at something solo. Given this number and comparing it to industry standards, again raids are not hard in GW2.

All I'm saying is:This recently established believe which has appeared as argument on the forums that content is not to difficult, but rather players simply assume they are able to perform well enough but decide not to, is not reflected in objective numbers present. It might be applicable to some players, but the harsh reality is rather: a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

It's fine to not want to play the content. It;s not fine to ASSUME one is good enough in said content without having ANY metrics or basis for this assumption. That's plain arrogance.

So you're just assuming that players that follow that belief never played that kind of content. That's a huge assumption. You're also assuming that it is only a recent belief, which it isn't. You're making huge stretches without having any metrics. Your "harsh reality" about the players against the current raids is based on your own assumptions, not an actual reality.

What are you talking about, I have by now mentioned 2 very objective sources which show that there is huge performance disparity.

A.) a direct developer quote, with recent actions into introducing specific contentB.) a data site which has data on a vast majority of successful clears of raids, which shows that even among successful raiders, there is huge disparity

I really can't follow your logic any longer.

This is not about players who have tried raids, were successful and decided they did not like the content. There are some of those and that was never disputed. This is about players who have 0 objective data on their performance making huge assumptions, which I simply disagree with. If someone has no data on their performance, it is prudent to not assume anything.

@Raknar.4735 said:The only actual harsh reality, which we can base on Anets' metrics is that raids have a lacking playerbase. Anet came to the conclusion it is due to difficulty, but they also state that if SMs don't "work out" (A hint of uncertainty? Could it be that they don't believe that SMs were the right decision?) they'll have to find another way.

That is a completely different issue... and while true, has nothing to do with player ability to clear content.

@Raknar.4735 said:The disparity between low-end groups and high end-groups doesn't matter, since, like you said yourself, the low-end groups are doing the content succesfully. So if the disparity there is huge, the "casual -> low-end disparity" is the one that matters, not the 10x disparity from "casual --> high-end" that anet mentioned.

?I was talking about the huge difference. Of course it matters because it shows that there is a HUGE gap. You can't declare something doesn't matter only because it fits your agenda.

@Raknar.4735 said:I can only speak for myself, since I've played raids and strike missions successfully. The content still is not in any way fun to me after having played it. It is nothing more than a dance routine. This has nothing to do with difficulty, but the content itself. This isn't based on assumptions, but my own perspective while playing the content.

That is a perfectly fine sentiment. You decided that the content is not for you. Now if you want to make assumptions about the entire player base, either use data given, or don't assume at all.

You don't see me get into detail of how easy or hard I find content for example based on MY experience. I am always linking some kind of data or data sets if possible. You can happily disagree with those.

@Raknar.4735 said:Comparing GW2 group system to industry standard makes it clear that GW2's system is complicated, not easier.

It's a regular LFG system without automation. Present in a lot of games for both content of this size as well as content of vastly bigger size.

EDIT:it seems gw2raidar was shut down mid of last year. Suffice to say, the log collections back then were painting a very clear picture of performance disparity between successful groups with up to 3 times higher damage in top end groups versus low end groups. Unfortunately this source is now gone too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raknar.4735

Raknar.4735

Posted
Posted

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

I've also seen plenty of people that claim that raids are unfun and that it has nothing to do with challenge.

Maybe, but the vast majority of complaints seem to be that they are too hard and that your average raider is a dickens.

It's easier to just say "raids are too hard", instead of stating the same reasons over and over again. People are tired of not being listened to.If the raids were easier they wouldn't have to waste their time with all the grouping, dance routines and other stuff. They'd not have to use their time for stuff they dislike.

You're assuming in order to make a point. That's never a good basis for arguments, especially if you assume other players positions. It's better to go by what was said, which supports the thesis that players feel raids are to hard, than assume something else was ment (which very well might be the case occasionally). Even this thread creator articulates why he wants an easier version of raids.

The metrics of player performance disparity also favor the reasoning that raids might be very or to challenging for many players.

I could turn your argument around and say:"Well if people do not succeed at things, they are more likely to perceive those things as unfun. As such enabling more players to be able to succeed at raids would solve the issue (which in turn can be done via different methods)." That statement would be far more supported by the current metrics and past threads on this topic.

There have been plenty of people stating that they don't do raids, not because of their difficulty, but for other reasons. Ignoring that fact is also not a good basis for arguments. The thread creator doesn't actually want "easier" versions of raids, he wants a mode in which he can experience the story. As he stated, it should be for "smaller and/or less skilled groups", it could also be a single player story instance, which would be far from the easy mode raids you're assuming he wants.

I never put that in question. What I am questioning is that these players make up a majority. Again, the metrics of performance disparity would not support this.

Even if they were a majority, I've never stated they are.If you mean the 10x dps difference stated by Anet by "metrics of performance disparity", they never actually elaborated on those stats. Did they compare them under the same conditions, so a full buffed raid situation? Did they just take an average of non-buffed people with bad gear/traits and a fully optimized person? You'd have to make some assumptions to use that argument, never a good basis for arguments ;)

The question is, how much of a stretch is made when assuming.

There are also other metrics available, for example gw2raidar gives an overview of how the highest and lowest performance groups, who are still successful, have performed. The disparity here is also huge.

@Raknar.4735 said:Also linking "performance" of players to "difficulty of content" is a stretch, since it would only be subjective. You also have to separate actual raid difficulty and the difficulty of the "preparation".

True, but this is not about objective content difficulty, since that is actually quite easily measured: you look at what is achievable in the system, then measure that against what is needed to succeed in the content. You can look at different factors like damage, healing, actions per minute, etc. then draw a conclusion. Raids are not to difficult given those criteria.

As to preparation, same reasoning applies: obviously gathering 10 players will be more difficult than going at something solo. Given this number and comparing it to industry standards, again raids are not hard in GW2.

All I'm saying is:This recently established believe which has appeared as argument on the forums that content is not to difficult, but rather players simply assume they are able to perform well enough but decide not to, is not reflected in objective numbers present. It might be applicable to some players, but the harsh reality is rather: a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

It's fine to not want to play the content. It;s not fine to ASSUME one is good enough in said content without having ANY metrics or basis for this assumption. That's plain arrogance.

So you're just assuming that players that follow that belief never played that kind of content. That's a huge assumption. You're also assuming that it is only a recent belief, which it isn't. You're making huge stretches without having any metrics. Your "harsh reality" about the players against the current raids is based on your own assumptions, not an actual reality.

What are you talking about, I have by now mentioned 2 very objective sources which show that there is huge performance disparity.

A.) a direct developer quote, with recent actions into introducing specific contentB.) a data site which has data on ALL successful clears of raids, which shows that even among successful raiders, there is huge disparity

I really can't follow your logic any longer.

This is not about players who have tried raids, were successful and decided they did not like the content. There are some of those and that was never disputed. This is about players who have 0 objective data on their performance making huge assumptions, which I simply disagree with. If someone has no data on their performance, it is prudent to not assume anything.

You're making the assumption that those that claim they may be able to beat the content, but actually can't, are in the majority of those that say they dislike raids.

harsh reality is rather: a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

It is simply wrong to assume that without having any stats about that population. The statistics you mentioned are not saying anything about that group of people. You have 0 objective data on that playerbase.It's kind of strange that you're making assumptions about them without any data to back that up.

@Raknar.4735 said:The only actual harsh reality, which we can base on Anets' metrics is that raids have a lacking playerbase. Anet came to the conclusion it is due to difficulty, but they also state that if SMs don't "work out" (A hint of uncertainty? Could it be that they don't believe that SMs were the right decision?) they'll have to find another way.

That is a completely different issue... and while true, has nothing to do with player ability to clear content.

@Raknar.4735 said:The disparity between low-end groups and high end-groups doesn't matter, since, like you said yourself, the low-end groups are doing the content succesfully. So if the disparity there is huge, the "casual -> low-end disparity" is the one that matters, not the 10x disparity from "casual --> high-end" that anet mentioned.

?I was talking about the huge difference. Of course it matters because it shows that there is a HUGE gap. You can't declare something doesn't matter only because it fits your agenda.

The top end doesn't matter for being able to clear the raids, like you said youself. You don't need to reach that "skill level", you only need the lower-end "skill level". Why should a person that is able to clear the raid in record time matter for regular raid cleartime? You can't just use any metrics to support your argument, without them actually supporting your argument.Your argument has been about succesfully clearing raids, not how fast or with how much dps it is done.

@Raknar.4735 said:Comparing GW2 group system to industry standard makes it clear that GW2's system is complicated, not easier.

It's a regular LFG system without automation. Present in a lot of games for both content of this size as well as content of vastly bigger size.

Except I'm not referring to the LFG, a grouping system, but the actual group system and group compositions. If you're talking about LFG systems, the other big MMOs have role based ones, not like in GW2, since roles are more complicated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyninja.2954

Cyninja.2954

Posted
Posted

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

I've also seen plenty of people that claim that raids are unfun and that it has nothing to do with challenge.

Maybe, but the vast majority of complaints seem to be that they are too hard and that your average raider is a dickens.

It's easier to just say "raids are too hard", instead of stating the same reasons over and over again. People are tired of not being listened to.If the raids were easier they wouldn't have to waste their time with all the grouping, dance routines and other stuff. They'd not have to use their time for stuff they dislike.

You're assuming in order to make a point. That's never a good basis for arguments, especially if you assume other players positions. It's better to go by what was said, which supports the thesis that players feel raids are to hard, than assume something else was ment (which very well might be the case occasionally). Even this thread creator articulates why he wants an easier version of raids.

The metrics of player performance disparity also favor the reasoning that raids might be very or to challenging for many players.

I could turn your argument around and say:"Well if people do not succeed at things, they are more likely to perceive those things as unfun. As such enabling more players to be able to succeed at raids would solve the issue (which in turn can be done via different methods)." That statement would be far more supported by the current metrics and past threads on this topic.

There have been plenty of people stating that they don't do raids, not because of their difficulty, but for other reasons. Ignoring that fact is also not a good basis for arguments. The thread creator doesn't actually want "easier" versions of raids, he wants a mode in which he can experience the story. As he stated, it should be for "smaller and/or less skilled groups", it could also be a single player story instance, which would be far from the easy mode raids you're assuming he wants.

I never put that in question. What I am questioning is that these players make up a majority. Again, the metrics of performance disparity would not support this.

Even if they were a majority, I've never stated they are.If you mean the 10x dps difference stated by Anet by "metrics of performance disparity", they never actually elaborated on those stats. Did they compare them under the same conditions, so a full buffed raid situation? Did they just take an average of non-buffed people with bad gear/traits and a fully optimized person? You'd have to make some assumptions to use that argument, never a good basis for arguments ;)

The question is, how much of a stretch is made when assuming.

There are also other metrics available, for example gw2raidar gives an overview of how the highest and lowest performance groups, who are still successful, have performed. The disparity here is also huge.

@Raknar.4735 said:Also linking "performance" of players to "difficulty of content" is a stretch, since it would only be subjective. You also have to separate actual raid difficulty and the difficulty of the "preparation".

True, but this is not about objective content difficulty, since that is actually quite easily measured: you look at what is achievable in the system, then measure that against what is needed to succeed in the content. You can look at different factors like damage, healing, actions per minute, etc. then draw a conclusion. Raids are not to difficult given those criteria.

As to preparation, same reasoning applies: obviously gathering 10 players will be more difficult than going at something solo. Given this number and comparing it to industry standards, again raids are not hard in GW2.

All I'm saying is:This recently established believe which has appeared as argument on the forums that content is not to difficult, but rather players simply assume they are able to perform well enough but decide not to, is not reflected in objective numbers present. It might be applicable to some players, but the harsh reality is rather: a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

It's fine to not want to play the content. It;s not fine to ASSUME one is good enough in said content without having ANY metrics or basis for this assumption. That's plain arrogance.

So you're just assuming that players that follow that belief never played that kind of content. That's a huge assumption. You're also assuming that it is only a recent belief, which it isn't. You're making huge stretches without having any metrics. Your "harsh reality" about the players against the current raids is based on your own assumptions, not an actual reality.

What are you talking about, I have by now mentioned 2 very objective sources which show that there is huge performance disparity.

A.) a direct developer quote, with recent actions into introducing specific contentB.) a data site which has data on ALL successful clears of raids, which shows that even among successful raiders, there is huge disparity

I really can't follow your logic any longer.

This is not about players who have tried raids, were successful and decided they did not like the content. There are some of those and that was never disputed. This is about players who have 0 objective data on their performance making huge assumptions, which I simply disagree with. If someone has no data on their performance, it is prudent to not assume anything.

You're making the assumption that those that claim they may be able to beat the content, but actually can't, are in the majority of those that say they dislike raids.

harsh reality is rather: a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

I'm saying, the metrics on player data suggest that is the case. I am not making any assumptions.

To assume would be to say:Well all those players were not trying, or not bringing top performance all the time, or simply decided to slack off making reward gain more risky and harder on themselves (which is not logical). While at the same time often brought as argument of players who have NEVER objectively even gauged their own performance (this is me assuming by the way based on subjective discussions on these forums and individual admittance of players to not have used the golem or in any way practiced).

@Raknar.4735 said:It is simply wrong to assume that without having any stats about that population. The statistics you mentioned are not saying anything about that group of people. You have 0 objective data on that playerbase.It's kind of strange that you're making assumptions about them without any data to back that up.

True, I am assuming a regular gauss distribution which would apply across the entire player base based on a subset of this bases performance. Which is actually unfavorable to my argument, since as I had mentioned, the data on successful raid clears already has a bias towards players who succeeded. In reality, the assumption would need to be far worse for the rest of the player base. Which by the way is reflected in the statement made by the developers being far bigger compared to the performance gap on successful raid data.

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:The only actual harsh reality, which we can base on Anets' metrics is that raids have a lacking playerbase. Anet came to the conclusion it is due to difficulty, but they also state that if SMs don't "work out" (A hint of uncertainty? Could it be that they don't believe that SMs were the right decision?) they'll have to find another way.

That is a completely different issue... and while true, has nothing to do with player ability to clear content.

@Raknar.4735 said:The disparity between low-end groups and high end-groups doesn't matter, since, like you said yourself, the low-end groups are doing the content succesfully. So if the disparity there is huge, the "casual -> low-end disparity" is the one that matters, not the 10x disparity from "casual --> high-end" that anet mentioned.

?I was talking about the huge difference. Of course it matters because it shows that there is a HUGE gap. You can't declare something doesn't matter only because it fits your agenda.

The top end doesn't matter for being able to clear the raids, like you said youself. You don't need to reach that "skill level", you only need the lower-end "skill level". Why should a person that is able to clear the raid in record time matter for regular raid cleartime? You can't just use any metrics to support your argument, without them actually supporting your argument.Your argument has been about succesfully clearing raids, not how fast or with how much dps it is done.

My argument has been about PLAYER PERFORMANCE DISPARITY. I am using a subset of the player bases performance, to which we as players have had access to in form of big data chunks, to demonstrate that this exist. Please don't make up arguments for me.

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:@Raknar.4735 said:Comparing GW2 group system to industry standard makes it clear that GW2's system is complicated, not easier.

It's a regular LFG system without automation. Present in a lot of games for both content of this size as well as content of vastly bigger size.

Except I'm not referring to the LFG, a grouping system, but the actual group system and group compositions. If you're talking about LFG systems, the other big MMOs have role based ones, not like in GW2, since roles are more complicated.

That is in part true yes, though there is already an established trinity in this game. There are also multiple ways of succeeding at content with cheese strategies which bypass the need for a trinity system (6-7 scourge raid groups for example, or even 10). Unfortunately in order to even be able to come up with such cheese setups, one must be semi engaged in this games content.

So yes, from that perspective, GW2 is more challenging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raknar.4735

Raknar.4735

Posted
Posted

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

I've also seen plenty of people that claim that raids are unfun and that it has nothing to do with challenge.

Maybe, but the vast majority of complaints seem to be that they are too hard and that your average raider is a dickens.

It's easier to just say "raids are too hard", instead of stating the same reasons over and over again. People are tired of not being listened to.If the raids were easier they wouldn't have to waste their time with all the grouping, dance routines and other stuff. They'd not have to use their time for stuff they dislike.

You're assuming in order to make a point. That's never a good basis for arguments, especially if you assume other players positions. It's better to go by what was said, which supports the thesis that players feel raids are to hard, than assume something else was ment (which very well might be the case occasionally). Even this thread creator articulates why he wants an easier version of raids.

The metrics of player performance disparity also favor the reasoning that raids might be very or to challenging for many players.

I could turn your argument around and say:"Well if people do not succeed at things, they are more likely to perceive those things as unfun. As such enabling more players to be able to succeed at raids would solve the issue (which in turn can be done via different methods)." That statement would be far more supported by the current metrics and past threads on this topic.

There have been plenty of people stating that they don't do raids, not because of their difficulty, but for other reasons. Ignoring that fact is also not a good basis for arguments. The thread creator doesn't actually want "easier" versions of raids, he wants a mode in which he can experience the story. As he stated, it should be for "smaller and/or less skilled groups", it could also be a single player story instance, which would be far from the easy mode raids you're assuming he wants.

I never put that in question. What I am questioning is that these players make up a majority. Again, the metrics of performance disparity would not support this.

Even if they were a majority, I've never stated they are.If you mean the 10x dps difference stated by Anet by "metrics of performance disparity", they never actually elaborated on those stats. Did they compare them under the same conditions, so a full buffed raid situation? Did they just take an average of non-buffed people with bad gear/traits and a fully optimized person? You'd have to make some assumptions to use that argument, never a good basis for arguments ;)

The question is, how much of a stretch is made when assuming.

There are also other metrics available, for example gw2raidar gives an overview of how the highest and lowest performance groups, who are still successful, have performed. The disparity here is also huge.

@Raknar.4735 said:Also linking "performance" of players to "difficulty of content" is a stretch, since it would only be subjective. You also have to separate actual raid difficulty and the difficulty of the "preparation".

True, but this is not about objective content difficulty, since that is actually quite easily measured: you look at what is achievable in the system, then measure that against what is needed to succeed in the content. You can look at different factors like damage, healing, actions per minute, etc. then draw a conclusion. Raids are not to difficult given those criteria.

As to preparation, same reasoning applies: obviously gathering 10 players will be more difficult than going at something solo. Given this number and comparing it to industry standards, again raids are not hard in GW2.

All I'm saying is:This recently established believe which has appeared as argument on the forums that content is not to difficult, but rather players simply assume they are able to perform well enough but decide not to, is not reflected in objective numbers present. It might be applicable to some players, but the harsh reality is rather: a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

It's fine to not want to play the content. It;s not fine to ASSUME one is good enough in said content without having ANY metrics or basis for this assumption. That's plain arrogance.

So you're just assuming that players that follow that belief never played that kind of content. That's a huge assumption. You're also assuming that it is only a recent belief, which it isn't. You're making huge stretches without having any metrics. Your "harsh reality" about the players against the current raids is based on your own assumptions, not an actual reality.

What are you talking about, I have by now mentioned 2 very objective sources which show that there is huge performance disparity.

A.) a direct developer quote, with recent actions into introducing specific contentB.) a data site which has data on ALL successful clears of raids, which shows that even among successful raiders, there is huge disparity

I really can't follow your logic any longer.

This is not about players who have tried raids, were successful and decided they did not like the content. There are some of those and that was never disputed. This is about players who have 0 objective data on their performance making huge assumptions, which I simply disagree with. If someone has no data on their performance, it is prudent to not assume anything.

You're making the assumption that those that claim they may be able to beat the content, but actually can't, are in the majority of those that say they dislike raids.

harsh reality is rather: a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

I'm saying, the metrics on player data suggest that is the case. I am not making any assumptions.

Then where are those metrics? I've only ever seen you mention them, but there are no actual stats. You're just assuming that is the case.

To assume would be to say:Well all those players were not trying, or not bringing top performance all the time, or simply decided to slack off making reward gain more risky and harder on themselves (which is not logical). While at the same time often brought as argument of players who have NEVER objectively even gauged their own performance.

Give me the data of those players that have never objectively even gauged their own performance, yet bring it up as argument. Are they truly the majority? I need the stats, not some assumptions. Actual percentages, not just handpicked forum posts. That's all I'm asking, actual stats.

@Raknar.4735 said:It is simply wrong to assume that without having any stats about that population. The statistics you mentioned are not saying anything about that group of people. You have 0 objective data on that playerbase.It's kind of strange that you're making assumptions about them without any data to back that up.

True, I am assuming a regular gauss distribution which would apply across the entire player base based on a subset of this bases performance. Which is actually unfavorable to my argument, since as I had mentioned, the data on successful raid clears already has a bias towards players who succeeded. In reality, the assumption would need to be far worse for the rest of the player base. Which by the way is reflected in the statement made by the developers being far bigger compared to the performance gap on successful raid data.

The GW2 Raidar data from back then also only had collective data about people actively uploading raidlogs. You'll also have to assume that every person that unsuccessfully raided uploaded their logs for the data to be representative. And that would still ignore people that successfully raided but still don't enjoy that specific content and would be in favour of a less tedious mode, may it be by making grouping easier, preparation faster or actually reducing difficulty.But in the end it doesn't tell us anything about who the people, that dislike raiding, are.

Along the same vein I'm sceptical about posts from other raiding games, claiming things like easy raids being more successful than hard raids:https://reddit.com/r/classicwow/comments/f7kajk/there_are_more_raiders_in_classic_than_retail_wcl/

Because Classic WoW doesn't really have anything else but raiding to do in the endgame, while retail gives more options.After all, a lot of people seem to have already left Classic, if superdata's stats are to be believed. (Subs down to 64% of Classic release subs)https://superdataresearch.com/blog/worldwide-digital-games-market/

@Raknar.4735 said:The only actual harsh reality, which we can base on Anets' metrics is that raids have a lacking playerbase. Anet came to the conclusion it is due to difficulty, but they also state that if SMs don't "work out" (A hint of uncertainty? Could it be that they don't believe that SMs were the right decision?) they'll have to find another way.

That is a completely different issue... and while true, has nothing to do with player ability to clear content.

@Raknar.4735 said:The disparity between low-end groups and high end-groups doesn't matter, since, like you said yourself, the low-end groups are doing the content succesfully. So if the disparity there is huge, the "casual -> low-end disparity" is the one that matters, not the 10x disparity from "casual --> high-end" that anet mentioned.

?I was talking about the huge difference. Of course it matters because it shows that there is a HUGE gap. You can't declare something doesn't matter only because it fits your agenda.

The top end doesn't matter for being able to clear the raids, like you said youself. You don't need to reach that "skill level", you only need the lower-end "skill level". Why should a person that is able to clear the raid in record time matter for regular raid cleartime? You can't just use any metrics to support your argument, without them actually supporting your argument.Your argument has been about succesfully clearing raids, not how fast or with how much dps it is done.

My argument has benn about PLAYER PERFORMANCE DISPARITY. I am using a subset of the player bases performance to demonstrate that this exist. Please don't make up arguments for me.

Of course a player performance disparity exists. Anet stated that. That player performance disparity says nothing about who the people are that complain about raids. Yet you're assuming that a majority of the "complainers" are on the lower end of player performance.It also completely ignores players on the lower end of player performance that absolutely don't care about raids, don't even complain, simply don't do that content and never will.

@Cyninja.2954 said:@Raknar.4735 said:Comparing GW2 group system to industry standard makes it clear that GW2's system is complicated, not easier.

It's a regular LFG system without automation. Present in a lot of games for both content of this size as well as content of vastly bigger size.

Except I'm not referring to the LFG, a grouping system, but the actual group system and group compositions. If you're talking about LFG systems, the other big MMOs have role based ones, not like in GW2, since roles are more complicated.

That is in part true yes, though there is already an established trinity in this game. There are also multiple ways of succeeding at content with cheese strategies which bypass the need for a trinity system (6-7 scourge raid groups for example, or even 10). Unfortunately in order to even be able to come up with such cheese setups, one must be semi engaged in this games content.

So yes, from that perspective, GW2 is more challenging.

I agree, GW2 has a soft trinity system. The existence of cheese strategies just increases the burden of knowledge placed on the player. Another good example would be hand kiting, which has specialized builds for it.Other MMOs base their encounter design on the hard trinity system, with mechanics clearly destined to be done by Tank/Healer/MDPS/RDPS. Rarely they also add something that distances itself from that basic design (e.g. Mage tank back in Gruul's Lair, 4Horsemen needing more tanks than normal raids).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyninja.2954

Cyninja.2954

Posted
Posted

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

I've also seen plenty of people that claim that raids are unfun and that it has nothing to do with challenge.

Maybe, but the vast majority of complaints seem to be that they are too hard and that your average raider is a dickens.

It's easier to just say "raids are too hard", instead of stating the same reasons over and over again. People are tired of not being listened to.If the raids were easier they wouldn't have to waste their time with all the grouping, dance routines and other stuff. They'd not have to use their time for stuff they dislike.

You're assuming in order to make a point. That's never a good basis for arguments, especially if you assume other players positions. It's better to go by what was said, which supports the thesis that players feel raids are to hard, than assume something else was ment (which very well might be the case occasionally). Even this thread creator articulates why he wants an easier version of raids.

The metrics of player performance disparity also favor the reasoning that raids might be very or to challenging for many players.

I could turn your argument around and say:"Well if people do not succeed at things, they are more likely to perceive those things as unfun. As such enabling more players to be able to succeed at raids would solve the issue (which in turn can be done via different methods)." That statement would be far more supported by the current metrics and past threads on this topic.

There have been plenty of people stating that they don't do raids, not because of their difficulty, but for other reasons. Ignoring that fact is also not a good basis for arguments. The thread creator doesn't actually want "easier" versions of raids, he wants a mode in which he can experience the story. As he stated, it should be for "smaller and/or less skilled groups", it could also be a single player story instance, which would be far from the easy mode raids you're assuming he wants.

I never put that in question. What I am questioning is that these players make up a majority. Again, the metrics of performance disparity would not support this.

Even if they were a majority, I've never stated they are.If you mean the 10x dps difference stated by Anet by "metrics of performance disparity", they never actually elaborated on those stats. Did they compare them under the same conditions, so a full buffed raid situation? Did they just take an average of non-buffed people with bad gear/traits and a fully optimized person? You'd have to make some assumptions to use that argument, never a good basis for arguments ;)

The question is, how much of a stretch is made when assuming.

There are also other metrics available, for example gw2raidar gives an overview of how the highest and lowest performance groups, who are still successful, have performed. The disparity here is also huge.

@Raknar.4735 said:Also linking "performance" of players to "difficulty of content" is a stretch, since it would only be subjective. You also have to separate actual raid difficulty and the difficulty of the "preparation".

True, but this is not about objective content difficulty, since that is actually quite easily measured: you look at what is achievable in the system, then measure that against what is needed to succeed in the content. You can look at different factors like damage, healing, actions per minute, etc. then draw a conclusion. Raids are not to difficult given those criteria.

As to preparation, same reasoning applies: obviously gathering 10 players will be more difficult than going at something solo. Given this number and comparing it to industry standards, again raids are not hard in GW2.

All I'm saying is:This recently established believe which has appeared as argument on the forums that content is not to difficult, but rather players simply assume they are able to perform well enough but decide not to, is not reflected in objective numbers present. It might be applicable to some players, but the harsh reality is rather: a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

It's fine to not want to play the content. It;s not fine to ASSUME one is good enough in said content without having ANY metrics or basis for this assumption. That's plain arrogance.

So you're just assuming that players that follow that belief never played that kind of content. That's a huge assumption. You're also assuming that it is only a recent belief, which it isn't. You're making huge stretches without having any metrics. Your "harsh reality" about the players against the current raids is based on your own assumptions, not an actual reality.

What are you talking about, I have by now mentioned 2 very objective sources which show that there is huge performance disparity.

A.) a direct developer quote, with recent actions into introducing specific contentB.) a data site which has data on ALL successful clears of raids, which shows that even among successful raiders, there is huge disparity

I really can't follow your logic any longer.

This is not about players who have tried raids, were successful and decided they did not like the content. There are some of those and that was never disputed. This is about players who have 0 objective data on their performance making huge assumptions, which I simply disagree with. If someone has no data on their performance, it is prudent to not assume anything.

You're making the assumption that those that claim they may be able to beat the content, but actually can't, are in the majority of those that say they dislike raids.

harsh reality is rather: a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

I'm saying, the metrics on player data suggest that is the case. I am not making any assumptions.

Then where are those metrics? I've only ever seen you mention them, but there are no actual stats. You're just assuming that is the case.

Yes, gw2raidar is not available any longer. It was for years. There are still logs and data available but not processed in a easily visible data. You can pretend this data was not there for years, which would clearly show how you decide to approach this issue. You are correct though that this resource is not available. It is referenced in past discussions on this matter.

Aside from that, we have the official comments from developers only.

@Raknar.4735 said:

To assume would be to say:Well all those players were not trying, or not bringing top performance all the time, or simply decided to slack off making reward gain more risky and harder on themselves (which is not logical). While at the same time often brought as argument of players who have NEVER objectively even gauged their own performance.

Give me the data of those players that have never objectively even gauged their own performance, yet bring it up as argument. Are they truly the majority? I need the stats, not some assumptions. Actual percentages, not just handpicked forum posts. That's all I'm asking, actual stats.

I mentioned that this part was me assuming. As far as data: again, gw2raidar was discontinued mid of last year. Relevant data to player performance is linked across old threads.

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:It is simply wrong to assume that without having any stats about that population. The statistics you mentioned are not saying anything about that group of people. You have 0 objective data on that playerbase.It's kind of strange that you're making assumptions about them without any data to back that up.

True, I am assuming a regular gauss distribution which would apply across the entire player base based on a subset of this bases performance. Which is actually unfavorable to my argument, since as I had mentioned, the data on successful raid clears already has a bias towards players who succeeded. In reality, the assumption would need to be far worse for the rest of the player base. Which by the way is reflected in the statement made by the developers being far bigger compared to the performance gap on successful raid data.

The GW2 Raidar data from back then also only had collective data about people actively uploading raidlogs. You'll also have to assume that every person that unsuccessfully raided uploaded their logs for the data to be representative. And that would still ignore people that successfully raided but still don't enjoy that specific content and would be in favour of a less tedious mode, may it be by making grouping easier, preparation faster or actually reducing difficulty.But in the end it doesn't tell us anything about who the people, that dislike raiding, are.

It doesn't have to. This is not about how many players disliked raids and were able to perform well enough. It is about a huge performance disparity present, which in recent days has been called into question.

@Raknar.4735 said:Along the same vein I'm sceptical about posts from other raiding games, claiming things like easy raids being more successful than hard raids:https://reddit.com/r/classicwow/comments/f7kajk/there_are_more_raiders_in_classic_than_retail_wcl/

Because Classic WoW doesn't really have anything else but raiding to do in the endgame, while retail gives more options.After all, a lot of people seem to have already left Classic, if superdata's stats are to be believed. (Subs down to 64% of Classic release subs)https://superdataresearch.com/blog/worldwide-digital-games-market/

Classic doubled WoW's subs. There is no Classic only sub. Each subscription to WoW gives access to both, retail and classic. You might want to reread what was said there:

The new World of Warcraft update Visions of N'Zoth successfully turned around declining user numbers. Subscriber numbers grew 17% from December to January (not including China). However, they were still down substantially (64%) from August 2019, the month World of Warcraft Classic was released.

The overall subs declined. Which can be attributed to multiple factors. It is impossible to make ANY outside assumptions based on the fact that the subscription decline can be in either part: retail or classic.

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:The only actual harsh reality, which we can base on Anets' metrics is that raids have a lacking playerbase. Anet came to the conclusion it is due to difficulty, but they also state that if SMs don't "work out" (A hint of uncertainty? Could it be that they don't believe that SMs were the right decision?) they'll have to find another way.

That is a completely different issue... and while true, has nothing to do with player ability to clear content.

@Raknar.4735 said:The disparity between low-end groups and high end-groups doesn't matter, since, like you said yourself, the low-end groups are doing the content succesfully. So if the disparity there is huge, the "casual -> low-end disparity" is the one that matters, not the 10x disparity from "casual --> high-end" that anet mentioned.

?I was talking about the huge difference. Of course it matters because it shows that there is a HUGE gap. You can't declare something doesn't matter only because it fits your agenda.

The top end doesn't matter for being able to clear the raids, like you said youself. You don't need to reach that "skill level", you only need the lower-end "skill level". Why should a person that is able to clear the raid in record time matter for regular raid cleartime? You can't just use any metrics to support your argument, without them actually supporting your argument.Your argument has been about succesfully clearing raids, not how fast or with how much dps it is done.

My argument has benn about PLAYER PERFORMANCE DISPARITY. I am using a subset of the player bases performance to demonstrate that this exist. Please don't make up arguments for me.

Of course a player performance disparity exists. Anet stated that. That player performance disparity says nothing about who the people are that complain about raids. Yet you're assuming that a majority of the "complainers" are on the lower end of player performance.It also completely ignores players on the lower end of player performance that absolutely don't care about raids, don't even complain, simply don't do that content and never will.

I'm assuming that the average player in GW2 is not able to complete raids without putting in additional work. I don't make any assumption on who complains.

I'm not the person going:Most player can complete raids, they simply do not chose to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raknar.4735

Raknar.4735

Posted
Posted

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.LFR is the problem, Mythic was introduced later to try to save the game by offering the "challenge", what the dev assumed they took away; an attempt to save their game. It didn't, was more than that (community etc) it created a rift and made mythic harder to access and thrive. Damage was done to the game's focus; Raids and irreversible. Both, devs (admitted) and players regretted over LFR's implementation.

That's in another game where Raid is their focus. How will easy mode work for Gw2 raids? Personally, I don't know.I do know however it will create a rift between the 2 modes as its not the same. Fractals 99 & 100 and CM. Strikes and Raids. Same, yet splitted.

@Raknar.4735 said:LFR is the only thing that saved raiding for WoW, without them they wouldn't be able to develop mythic difficulty ones.

It's a really weird statement since even Blizz said that LFR hurt the game. Not to mention the fact that it's the concesus among the players. Mythic has nothing to do with that 0.0, mythic was actually a throwback to traditional raiding.

Not that weird of a statement. Barely anyone but the top does Mythic. Not even hardcore players like Asmongold, who I consider one, if not the most invested player in the game, clears current raids in Mythic difficulty.

I actually would like to see where Blizz admitted that LFR was a mistake, I guess I missed that post by them. Care to share a link? I'd think they would have removed it by now, if it truly was bad for the game.

Edit: Also funny that the creator of Warcraft Logs says the following:
That could also be because he has a bias against retail, but idk. I haven't really followed the WoW raiding scene and their drama.

Well, that's kinda the whole point of mythic. Don't forget WoW has a gear treadmill so it takes dedication to just get gear for mythic.Btw, classic raiding was much less accessible than raiding in wrath forward so that comment seems weird to me unless he actually means to bash super easy content.

Raiding in Classic is very accessible now, since people know about the raids. Only a small amount of people actually raided during Vanilla. MC and BWL are being Pugged all the time. He's specifically bashing the retail raids that are just mechanically hard content instead of a social experience like in the past / in Classic.

Asmongold doesn't like LFR, yet he still does it. He also pugged normal difficulty all the time. Yet he doesn't really do Mythic. Says alot about the playrate of that content from a dedicated player.

The fact that he does it despite the fact that he doesn't like it, is one of the many reasons it's such a bad thing. When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

Soooo, unique rewards for raiding or any other content is bad? I agree. Everything should be attainable in any gamemode. That way we wouldn't even need a "story mode" for raids.

But that's not the issue here. If Asmondgold does Heroic/Normal that means he isn't interested doing raids just for the story, so there shouldn't be a need for him to do LFR. Blizzard however made LFR a part of the gearing ladder, which gw2 doesnt even have, so he does LFR despite the fact that he doesn't like it. It really doesnt have anything to do with the point you made.In GW2 that's not an issue at all, you can get all the things you want from any game mode. Leggy armor can be obtained for wvw and pvp too.

But the legendary skins would be a certain reward. The same goes for some other raidskins. In order to get them you would need to do the corresponding raids. There are people that raid just for the skins, even if they aren't interested in doing raids. I don't really see the difference. Yes, one is bound to stats, but that's just because WoW is based on vertical progression. You also don't need LFR gear to do normal raids. There are also multiple ways to get similiar gear with the same iLVL as LFR gear through World Quests and stuff, so you aren't forced to do LFR just to get stats.

Well, unique skins to certain forms of content is more than fair IMHO. The difference seems obvious since skins to offer anything mechanically. I think we should have raid skins, pvp skins, wvw skins.

In wow you can avoid LFR if you want but the fact that it pulls Heroic and Normal raiders screams bad design.

Raids in GW2 also pull people that wouldn't normally raid, or dislike raiding, just for the skins or the easy access to legendary armor, so I'd also call that bad design.

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I guess we just have a different definition of "certain reward", as I don't restrict it to numerical values/upgrades. Skins, teleportation devices, chairs etc. are also rewards for me that are restricted to certain areas of the game I personally dislike.

They do? Why? If you don't like raiding the pvp/wvwvw leggy armor is far easier to get. And you get the utility of the leggy armor.I think unique skins are absolutely a must. I mean, lets say you beat a certain piece of challanging content and you wanna show it, how else would you do it? Seems rather weird that you would get the same reward without the challange. Just the unique pvp titles.

Idk, legendary raid armour has always felt easier to get to me than PvP or WvW armour. It's just some scripted dance routine over and over.Also someone that exclusively plays PvE would not have another choice than go for the raid armor.It really just boils down to

When someone does a piece of content even if he hates it just to get a certain reward its a rather bad sign IMHO.

I've never really felt the need to show off anything to anyone, I only really care about my own character or good looking characters. Like why would they even care? Not like doing a scripted bossfight is something unique. I only really admire people that do truly unique feats, like the Dark Souls challenges I mentioned, or speedrunners. They don't actually get anything for that, just the fame that they've done it.

I totally agree on the first part. Yet somehow loads of people complain that raids are too hard.

I've also seen plenty of people that claim that raids are unfun and that it has nothing to do with challenge.

Maybe, but the vast majority of complaints seem to be that they are too hard and that your average raider is a dickens.

It's easier to just say "raids are too hard", instead of stating the same reasons over and over again. People are tired of not being listened to.If the raids were easier they wouldn't have to waste their time with all the grouping, dance routines and other stuff. They'd not have to use their time for stuff they dislike.

You're assuming in order to make a point. That's never a good basis for arguments, especially if you assume other players positions. It's better to go by what was said, which supports the thesis that players feel raids are to hard, than assume something else was ment (which very well might be the case occasionally). Even this thread creator articulates why he wants an easier version of raids.

The metrics of player performance disparity also favor the reasoning that raids might be very or to challenging for many players.

I could turn your argument around and say:"Well if people do not succeed at things, they are more likely to perceive those things as unfun. As such enabling more players to be able to succeed at raids would solve the issue (which in turn can be done via different methods)." That statement would be far more supported by the current metrics and past threads on this topic.

There have been plenty of people stating that they don't do raids, not because of their difficulty, but for other reasons. Ignoring that fact is also not a good basis for arguments. The thread creator doesn't actually want "easier" versions of raids, he wants a mode in which he can experience the story. As he stated, it should be for "smaller and/or less skilled groups", it could also be a single player story instance, which would be far from the easy mode raids you're assuming he wants.

I never put that in question. What I am questioning is that these players make up a majority. Again, the metrics of performance disparity would not support this.

Even if they were a majority, I've never stated they are.If you mean the 10x dps difference stated by Anet by "metrics of performance disparity", they never actually elaborated on those stats. Did they compare them under the same conditions, so a full buffed raid situation? Did they just take an average of non-buffed people with bad gear/traits and a fully optimized person? You'd have to make some assumptions to use that argument, never a good basis for arguments ;)

The question is, how much of a stretch is made when assuming.

There are also other metrics available, for example gw2raidar gives an overview of how the highest and lowest performance groups, who are still successful, have performed. The disparity here is also huge.

@Raknar.4735 said:Also linking "performance" of players to "difficulty of content" is a stretch, since it would only be subjective. You also have to separate actual raid difficulty and the difficulty of the "preparation".

True, but this is not about objective content difficulty, since that is actually quite easily measured: you look at what is achievable in the system, then measure that against what is needed to succeed in the content. You can look at different factors like damage, healing, actions per minute, etc. then draw a conclusion. Raids are not to difficult given those criteria.

As to preparation, same reasoning applies: obviously gathering 10 players will be more difficult than going at something solo. Given this number and comparing it to industry standards, again raids are not hard in GW2.

All I'm saying is:This recently established believe which has appeared as argument on the forums that content is not to difficult, but rather players simply assume they are able to perform well enough but decide not to, is not reflected in objective numbers present. It might be applicable to some players, but the harsh reality is rather: a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

It's fine to not want to play the content. It;s not fine to ASSUME one is good enough in said content without having ANY metrics or basis for this assumption. That's plain arrogance.

So you're just assuming that players that follow that belief never played that kind of content. That's a huge assumption. You're also assuming that it is only a recent belief, which it isn't. You're making huge stretches without having any metrics. Your "harsh reality" about the players against the current raids is based on your own assumptions, not an actual reality.

What are you talking about, I have by now mentioned 2 very objective sources which show that there is huge performance disparity.

A.) a direct developer quote, with recent actions into introducing specific contentB.) a data site which has data on ALL successful clears of raids, which shows that even among successful raiders, there is huge disparity

I really can't follow your logic any longer.

This is not about players who have tried raids, were successful and decided they did not like the content. There are some of those and that was never disputed. This is about players who have 0 objective data on their performance making huge assumptions, which I simply disagree with. If someone has no data on their performance, it is prudent to not assume anything.

You're making the assumption that those that claim they may be able to beat the content, but actually can't, are in the majority of those that say they dislike raids.

harsh reality is rather: a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

I'm saying, the metrics on player data suggest that is the case. I am not making any assumptions.

Then where are those metrics? I've only ever seen you mention them, but there are no actual stats. You're just assuming that is the case.

Yes, gw2raidar is not available any longer. It was for years. There are still logs and data available but not processed in a easily visible data. You can pretend this data was not there for years, which would clearly show how you decide to approach this issue. You are correct though that this resource is not available. It is referenced in past discussions on this matter.

Aside from that, we have the official comments from developers only.

To assume would be to say:Well all those players were not trying, or not bringing top performance all the time, or simply decided to slack off making reward gain more risky and harder on themselves (which is not logical). While at the same time often brought as argument of players who have NEVER objectively even gauged their own performance.

Give me the data of those players that have never objectively even gauged their own performance, yet bring it up as argument. Are they truly the majority? I need the stats, not some assumptions. Actual percentages, not just handpicked forum posts. That's all I'm asking, actual stats.

I mentioned that this part was me assuming. As far as data: again, gw2raidar was discontinued mid of last year. Relevant data to player performance is linked across old threads.

I'm not pretending the data wasn't there. Like I already said GW2Raidar doesn't say anything about this:

harsh reality is rather: a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

NOTHING about GW2Raidars data is able to proof that the majority of players don't admit they're not "good enough", but instead complain about their lack of success.I want data for that claim.

I bet there's even a good amount of players that know they would be a burden and don't begin raiding because of that, to not weigh down the group.I know there is a huge player performance disparity, I've never said anything against that. But that still doesn't tell us anything about the skill-level of the "complainers". I want actual data that the majority of those that want easier raids belong to the lower end of the player performance disparity.

@Raknar.4735 said:It is simply wrong to assume that without having any stats about that population. The statistics you mentioned are not saying anything about that group of people. You have 0 objective data on that playerbase.It's kind of strange that you're making assumptions about them without any data to back that up.

True, I am assuming a regular gauss distribution which would apply across the entire player base based on a subset of this bases performance. Which is actually unfavorable to my argument, since as I had mentioned, the data on successful raid clears already has a bias towards players who succeeded. In reality, the assumption would need to be far worse for the rest of the player base. Which by the way is reflected in the statement made by the developers being far bigger compared to the performance gap on successful raid data.

The GW2 Raidar data from back then also only had collective data about people actively uploading raidlogs. You'll also have to assume that every person that unsuccessfully raided uploaded their logs for the data to be representative. And that would still ignore people that successfully raided but still don't enjoy that specific content and would be in favour of a less tedious mode, may it be by making grouping easier, preparation faster or actually reducing difficulty.But in the end it doesn't tell us anything about who the people, that dislike raiding, are.

It doesn't have to. This is not about how many players disliked raids and were able to perform well enough. It is about a huge performance disparity present, which in recent days has been called into question.

It actually is about that, since you are implying that the complaining people are the ones that wouldn't be able to beat the content. That they are on the lower end of the performance scale. The ones disliking raids in their current state.

@Raknar.4735 said:Along the same vein I'm sceptical about posts from other raiding games, claiming things like easy raids being more successful than hard raids:

Because Classic WoW doesn't really have anything else but raiding to do in the endgame, while retail gives more options.After all, a lot of people seem to have already left Classic, if superdata's stats are to be believed. (Subs down to 64% of Classic release subs)

Classic doubled WoW's subs. There is no Classic only sub. Each subscription to WoW gives access to both, retail and classic. You might want to reread what was said there:

The new World of Warcraft update Visions of N'Zoth successfully turned around declining user numbers. Subscriber numbers grew 17% from December to January (not including China). However, they were still down substantially (64%) from August 2019, the month World of Warcraft Classic was released.

I know that both subs are the same. The initial increase of subs with Classics release makes it clear that people subbed specifically for Classic. And apparently more people were doing Classic raid content than Retail raid content, according to the WarcraftLogs-Creator.

The overall subs declined. Which can be attributed to multiple factors. It is impossible to make ANY outside assumptions based on the fact that the subscription decline can be in either part: retail or classic.

Of course the decline can be on either side, or on both simultaneously. But the fact is still there has been an update that pushed retail % again. I still think it's fair to assume which side might have been the one that lost more subs %. I don't mind you disagreeing here, since it is just an assumption.

@Raknar.4735 said:The only actual harsh reality, which we can base on Anets' metrics is that raids have a lacking playerbase. Anet came to the conclusion it is due to difficulty, but they also state that if SMs don't "work out" (A hint of uncertainty? Could it be that they don't believe that SMs were the right decision?) they'll have to find another way.

That is a completely different issue... and while true, has nothing to do with player ability to clear content.

@Raknar.4735 said:The disparity between low-end groups and high end-groups doesn't matter, since, like you said yourself, the low-end groups are doing the content succesfully. So if the disparity there is huge, the "casual -> low-end disparity" is the one that matters, not the 10x disparity from "casual --> high-end" that anet mentioned.

?I was talking about the huge difference. Of course it matters because it shows that there is a HUGE gap. You can't declare something doesn't matter only because it fits your agenda.

The top end doesn't matter for being able to clear the raids, like you said youself. You don't need to reach that "skill level", you only need the lower-end "skill level". Why should a person that is able to clear the raid in record time matter for regular raid cleartime? You can't just use any metrics to support your argument, without them actually supporting your argument.Your argument has been about succesfully clearing raids, not how fast or with how much dps it is done.

My argument has benn about PLAYER PERFORMANCE DISPARITY. I am using a subset of the player bases performance to demonstrate that this exist. Please don't make up arguments for me.

Of course a player performance disparity exists. Anet stated that. That player performance disparity says nothing about who the people are that complain about raids. Yet you're assuming that a majority of the "complainers" are on the lower end of player performance.It also completely ignores players on the lower end of player performance that absolutely don't care about raids, don't even complain, simply don't do that content and never will.

I'm assuming that the average player in GW2 is not able to complete raids without putting in additional work. I don't make any assumption on who complains.

I'm not the person going:Most player can complete raids, they simply do not chose to.

You're the one going:

This recently established believe which has appeared as argument on the forums that content is not to difficult, but rather players simply assume they are able to perform well enough but decide not to, is not reflected in objective numbers present.

a vast majority of players are not able to perform well enough, but instead of admitting this to themselves, they'd rather use other reasons for their lack of success.

And they aren't allowed to assume their skill level because they haven't raided before or have done a dance routine at a golem. Sounds a lot like you're assuming the skill level of those players that are complaining / say they are able to beat the content, without actually having stats for that "majority".

The average player doesn't go to the forums to talk about if content is difficult or not.Who actually says "most player can complete raids, they simply do not chose to?". I haven't heard that sentiment, just anecdotes of people saying they themselves can beat raids/SMs, but choose not to play that content.

The sentiment I'm seeing is: "the reason some players don't do raids has nothing to do with difficulty."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raknar.4735

Raknar.4735

Posted
Posted

Also, this is dragging on way too long for a discussion, that is based on Amaranthe's anecdotal evidence, and my assumption that people can't be bothered to explain anymore, a discussion we both will never agree on, when the actual thread should be about alternatives to the current raid situation (A topic that also seems to reappear every day as a new post).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astralporing.1957

Astralporing.1957

Posted
Posted

@"Cyninja.2954" said:I'm assuming that the average player in GW2 is not able to complete raids without putting in additional work. I don't make any assumption on who complains.

I'm not the person going:Most player can complete raids, they simply do not chose to.Notice, that one does not conflict with the other. In fact, both are probably true at the same time.

So, yeah, the average player in GW2 is not able to complete raids without putting in additional work. They most likely could be able to complete raids if they put in that additional work, but they simply not chose to do so.

In general, it's not the difficulty of raids per se that is stopping people. It's that "need to put additional work" part that is a problem. Most players could easily improve to the point where the raid difficulty would not be an issue, but that would require them sinking a lot of time and effort into things they don't consider fun. All in order to play the content they might not consider fun either.No wonder most people do not bother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyninja.2954

Cyninja.2954

Posted
Posted

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@"Cyninja.2954" said:I'm assuming that the average player in GW2 is not able to complete raids without putting in additional work. I don't make any assumption on who complains.

I'm not the person going:Most player can complete raids, they simply do not chose to.Notice, that one does not conflict with the other. In fact, both are probably true at the same time.

So, yeah, the average player in GW2 is not able to complete raids without putting in additional work. They most likely
could
be able to complete raids
if
they put in that additional work, but they simply not chose to do so.

In general, it's not the difficulty of raids per se that is stopping people. It's that "need to put additional work" part that is a problem. Most players could easily improve to the point where the raid difficulty would not be an issue, but that would require them sinking a lot of time and effort into things they don't consider fun. All in order to play the content they might not consider fun either.No wonder most people do not bother.

True, and that would be an issue with getting players interested in the content, if at all possible. Which is a valid concern.

It would still go against the current new arguments which have been appearing: raids are not to hard. Players are good enough, they simply do not chose to play them. (in part appearing I believe in contrast to Arenanet trying to implement strikes and improve the overall player base performance and contrary to a huge amount of complaints in the past).

I don't care about what players can "potentially" achieve. The state of where they are at now matters when looking at performance. The developers are trying to bridge this gap. The question of if they should from a perspective of if there is enough players interested, is a different one.

I'm fine with players arguing that they don't want challenging content. That's a matter of perspective and preference.I'm fine with players arguing they have been successful in challenging content and chose not to engage in it because they do not enjoy it. That's a matter of experience.I'm not fine with those players suddenly going: well I could be good enough if I wanted to, I simply chose not to. That's a matter of ignorance, and ignorance is bliss as we all know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astralporing.1957

Astralporing.1957

Posted
Posted

@"Cyninja.2954" said:

True, and that would be an issue with getting players interested in the content, if at all possible. Which is a valid concern.

It would still go against the current new arguments which have been appearing: raids are not to hard. Players are good enough, they simply do not chose to play them. (in part appearing I believe in contrast to Arenanet trying to implement strikes and improve the overall player base performance and contrary to a huge amount of complaints in the past).Okay, let me rephrase. Raids are not too hard to do them. Most players would be able to do them if they were willing to put enough effort in it. They are however too hard to have fun in them. Because most of the elements that make them not fun are a byproduct of their difficulty level.Does that sound better?(and yes, i am good enough to raid. I just do not find them fun, and thus i choose to not play them)

I don't care about what players can "potentially" achieve. The state of where they are at now matters when looking at performance. The developers are trying to bridge this gap. The question of if they should from a perspective of if there is enough players interested, is a different one.Ah, but that's the point - the devs do not try to bridge the gap. That can only be achieved by either changes to game mechanics so the gap gets smaller on its own, or by creating such a type of content that would somehow teach players in such a way they'd close the gap themselves. Strikes do not teach anything - they only require increased skill from strike to strike, but they offer no tools whatsoever that players might use to improve themselves. or at least they offer no tools that haven;t been already available in the game.In short, the strikes are based around the assumption that was brought up - that the players either are or could be good enough to play more difficult content, they just don't want to. Developers simply hope that the strikes will somehow make players want to play that type o content, even when they didn't want before.

What the strikes cannot do is to improve the skill level of players that will remain as (not)interested in that type of content and as (not) willing to spend effort on it as before.

I'm fine with players arguing that they don't want challenging content. That's a matter of perspective and preference.I'm fine with players arguing they have been successful in challenging content and chose not to engage in it because they do not enjoy it. That's a matter of experience.I'm not fine with those players suddenly going: well I could be good enough if I wanted to, I simply chose not to. That's a matter of ignorance, and ignorance is bliss as we all know.Ironically, that "you could do that, if you only tried" is something the whole raid community kept telling to those very same players for the last few years. And now, when those players start agreeing, it is suddenly wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyninja.2954

Cyninja.2954

Posted
Posted

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@"Cyninja.2954" said:

True, and that would be an issue with getting players interested in the content, if at all possible. Which is a valid concern.

It would still go against the current new arguments which have been appearing: raids are not to hard. Players are good enough, they simply do not chose to play them. (in part appearing I believe in contrast to Arenanet trying to implement strikes and improve the overall player base performance and contrary to a huge amount of complaints in the past).Okay, let me rephrase. Raids are not too hard to do them. Most players would be able to do them if they were willing to put enough effort in it. They are however too hard
to have fun in them
. Because most of the elements that make them not fun are a byproduct of their difficulty level.Does that sound better?(and yes, i
am
good enough to raid. I just do not find them fun, and thus i choose to not play them)

I don't care about what players can "potentially" achieve. The state of where they are at now matters when looking at performance. The developers are trying to bridge this gap. The question of if they should from a perspective of if there is enough players interested, is a different one.Ah, but that's the point - the devs do not try to bridge the gap. That can only be achieved by either changes to game mechanics so the gap gets smaller on its own, or by creating such a type of content that would somehow teach players in such a way they'd close the gap themselves. Strikes do not teach anything - they only require increased skill from strike to strike, but they offer no tools whatsoever that players might use to improve themselves. or at least they offer no tools that haven;t been already available in the game.In short, the strikes are based around the assumption that was brought up - that the players either are or could be good enough to play more difficult content, they just don't want to. Developers simply hope that the strikes will somehow make players want to play that type o content, even when they didn't want before.

What the strikes cannot do is to improve the skill level of players that will remain as (not)interested in that type of content and as (not) willing to spend effort on it as before.

Again, this falls in a different category and would be considered under: does it make sense what is being done. Everything else is just your opinion.

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@"Cyninja.2954" said:I'm fine with players arguing that they don't want challenging content. That's a matter of perspective and preference.I'm fine with players arguing they have been successful in challenging content and chose not to engage in it because they do not enjoy it. That's a matter of experience.I'm not fine with those players suddenly going: well I could be good enough if I wanted to, I simply chose not to. That's a matter of ignorance, and ignorance is bliss as we all know.Ironically, that "you could do that, if you only tried" is something the whole raid community kept telling to those very same players for the last few years. And now, when those players start agreeing, it is suddenly wrong.

Not sure what you are talking about.

Let me repeat:I disagree with players who are not invested or experienced enough making claims about this games difficulty as though they had already mastered the mere basics (or about the vast majority of the player base given the huge performance disparities). If you want informed opinions, you need to actually be knowledgeable about what you are talking about (which can be taken as synonymous with having enough experience with it). As it stands right now: many players would NOT cut it in raids performance wise.

That does not conflict with the assumption that a vast majority of players could complete raid content IF they tried and practiced in the future. On the contrary, it would be wonderful if players actually invested some more time in understanding this game and getting better and THEN chiming in about raids and challenging content.

Again, the metrics we have had does no suggest that a big majority of players is at that stages NOW. Making assumptions about how many can and want to get good enough is just that: assumptions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vinceman.4572

Vinceman.4572

Posted
Posted

@"Cyninja.2954" said:That does not conflict with the assumption that a vast majority of players could complete raid content IF they tried and practiced in the future. On the contrary, it would be wonderful if players actually invested some more time in understanding this game and getting better and THEN chiming in about raids and challenging content.

Again, the metrics we have had does no suggest that a big majority of players is at that stages NOW. Making assumptions about how many can and want to get good enough is just that: assumptions.

Well, one thing that was shown to us over almost 8 years now is the fact that the overwhelming majority of GW2 players is not interested in practicing and "investing". That's totally fine (for me at least) and I would be happy about it if Arenanet finally would accept that and stop trying to bring those two opposites together. Of course there are intermediates but overall there are certain subsets of players.The point that the raid community is losing players isn't astonishing so is the overall ingame population. A heavy focus on LS (like we have now) and additional teams for WvW, PvP & challenging PvE content would still be the best for the game - nothing else. I'm sure if Anet did professional customer research they would have understood that but the management was not competent enough for that which is no wonder since programmers/devs are not the best personell for leading a company. You need professionals for that.I like almost every other person here as well wished that they had a better communication competence and give more reasons for their decisions. A good call concerning raids would have been to tell the audience that there is a need of said content and that they want to care about everyone in their community. They missed that so lots of players had the impression that raids were only made for a tiny tiny tiny minority while that wasn't the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Seth Moonshadow.2710

Seth Moonshadow.2710

Posted
Posted

IIRC there was a pol done on this topic along the lines of a challenge mote to decrease and increase the challenge rating. I don't recall what the result was but nothing in game happened from it either.

Though I agree, I'd love to dungeon style the raids. But then RAIDs are excerpts from the LWS Story arcs to begin with. But they do add some good tid bits.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
GuildWars2.com
ArenaNet

©2020 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

ESRB - Teen
×
×
  • Create New...