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

[maddoctor.2738]

@Vayne.8563 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:Raid-like content as they get harder and I've tried the harder ones and they are.

Did you try the easier ones? They aren't any harder than T1 fractals and most dungeons. Also, they are all you need to finish the meta.

Because they wouldn't need to do this is raids weren't in the game at all.

We'd have more fractals and/or dungeons if Raids weren't in the game at all. Something similar in challenge as Strike Missions.

Okay first of all, let's talk about casual players. I'll wager most casual players never come to the forums at all. They never go to reddit. If they do they don't spend a long time here. Most casual players log into the game and play the game.. You keep asking me if I did this or I did that. No. I listen to people all day who tried a strike mission not realizing how different they were, had a bad experience and walked away without any intention of going back. You can't just throw a bunch of strike missions into a game with greatly varying difficulties if you're not going to include a breadcrumb trail.

That's completely different issue with Strike Missions as there is no indicator of which one is easy and which one is hard. But there is an easy solution for that: Arenanet adds a little text next to each Strike Missions indicating which one is hard and which one is easy, similar to how the tiers of Fractals work. That way these people who tried Boneskinner or Whisper of Jormag as their first ever Strike will see that they are "tough encounters" and instead opt to play the "easy encounters".

And I'm asking because repeatedly you are talking as if Strikes are Raids and raid content, when more than half of them are on same level as Fractals and Dungeons. It's weird to think that someone that has run Ascalonian Catacombs story mode (the first dungeon in the game) or a Fractal like T1 Cliffside will have an issue with either of the easy Strike Missions. And those are more than enough to finish the meta.

Most casual players log into the game and play the game..

So you are saying that those casual players that never go outside the game finish the zone meta? That's impressive.

Actually many people just play with their guild to get it done. That's what we do. Someone probably does look it up, then leads a bunch of other people around.

How is it then that someone didn't read which Strike Missions are easier than others to direct the rest of the players there? And also read about the achievements in the harder ones that are actually freebies.

Strike Missions need some way to tell players which ones are easy and which ones are hard, that will solve the problem of players walking into the harder ones then getting a bad experience. Meanwhile, for those going for the meta achievement, the one that reads the achievements can direct the rest of the players properly and lead them to the easy ones, telling them to avoid the harder ones.

Once players realize (or are told) that they can finish the meta by completing missions that are similar to fractals/dungeons then this problem will be severely diminished. Leaving the only ones that will have an issue, those that have a problem with any kind of instanced content, including running T1 fractals and dungeons. The next question would be how many players go for meta achievements and actively avoid all forms of instanced content? Hard to answer, but hopefully Arenanet has the answer and will adjust future zone meta achievements accordingly.

The problem is I'm ususally the guy helping people in my guild and this time I'm not doing it because I don't have an interest in the zone because of the inclusions of strike missions. I won't get it and I'd imagine a dozen other people at least in my guild won't because of that. The thing is If I"m turned off others are too. You keep saying strike missions are casual content and I'm thinking how are you more qualified than me to make that assessemnt.

That depends if you qualify T1 Fractals and Dungeons as casual content. I'm saying Strike Missions are the same as those I don't recall saying directly that Strike Missions are casual content. I'm simply making a comparison between content that is nearly the same.

Edit: and there are dungeon paths/Fractals that are considerably harder than the easier Strike Missions.

Maybe we should poll all self-identified casuals and ask them, but I strongly suspect you'd be surprised.

All self-identified casuals that finish map zone metas, there is a clear distinction here. I even wonder how many self-identified casuals go to complete map metas in the first place, but we won't know without some extra data, which we don't have.

[Vayne.8563]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:Raid-like content as they get harder and I've tried the harder ones and they are.

Did you try the easier ones? They aren't any harder than T1 fractals and most dungeons. Also, they are all you need to finish the meta.

Because they wouldn't need to do this is raids weren't in the game at all.

We'd have more fractals and/or dungeons if Raids weren't in the game at all. Something similar in challenge as Strike Missions.

Okay first of all, let's talk about casual players. I'll wager most casual players never come to the forums at all. They never go to reddit. If they do they don't spend a long time here. Most casual players log into the game and play the game.. You keep asking me if I did this or I did that. No. I listen to people all day who tried a strike mission not realizing how different they were, had a bad experience and walked away without any intention of going back. You can't just throw a bunch of strike missions into a game with greatly varying difficulties if you're not going to include a breadcrumb trail.

That's completely different issue with Strike Missions as there is no indicator of which one is easy and which one is hard. But there is an easy solution for that: Arenanet adds a little text next to each Strike Missions indicating which one is hard and which one is easy, similar to how the tiers of Fractals work. That way these people who tried Boneskinner or Whisper of Jormag as their first ever Strike will see that they are "tough encounters" and instead opt to play the "easy encounters".

And I'm asking because repeatedly you are talking as if Strikes are Raids and raid content, when more than half of them are on same level as Fractals and Dungeons. It's weird to think that someone that has run Ascalonian Catacombs story mode (the first dungeon in the game) or a Fractal like T1 Cliffside will have an issue with either of the easy Strike Missions. And those are more than enough to finish the meta.

Most casual players log into the game and play the game..

So you are saying that those casual players that never go outside the game finish the zone meta? That's impressive.

Actually many people just play with their guild to get it done. That's what we do. Someone probably does look it up, then leads a bunch of other people around.

How is it then that someone didn't read which Strike Missions are easier than others to direct the rest of the players there? And also read about the achievements in the harder ones that are actually freebies.

Strike Missions need some way to tell players which ones are easy and which ones are hard, that will solve the problem of players walking into the harder ones then getting a bad experience. Meanwhile, for those going for the meta achievement, the one that reads the achievements can direct the rest of the players properly and lead them to the easy ones, telling them to avoid the harder ones.

Once players realize (or are told) that they can finish the meta by completing missions that are similar to fractals/dungeons then this problem will be severely diminished. Leaving the only ones that will have an issue, those that have a problem with any kind of instanced content, including running T1 fractals and dungeons. The next question would be how many players go for meta achievements and actively avoid all forms of instanced content? Hard to answer, but hopefully Arenanet has the answer and will adjust future zone meta achievements accordingly.

The problem is I'm ususally the guy helping people in my guild and this time I'm not doing it because I don't have an interest in the zone because of the inclusions of strike missions. I won't get it and I'd imagine a dozen other people at least in my guild won't because of that. The thing is If I"m turned off others are too. You keep saying strike missions are casual content and I'm thinking how are you more qualified than me to make that assessemnt.

That depends if you qualify T1 Fractals and Dungeons as casual content. I'm saying Strike Missions are the same as those I don't recall saying directly that Strike Missions are casual content. I'm simply making a comparison between content that is nearly the same.

Edit: and there are dungeon paths/Fractals that are considerably harder than the easier Strike Missions.

Maybe we should poll all self-identified casuals and ask them, but I strongly suspect you'd be surprised.

All self-identified casuals that finish map zone metas, there is a clear distinction here. I even wonder how many self-identified casuals go to complete map metas in the first place, but we won't know without some extra data, which we don't have.

I guess there's degrees of casual in my mind. I have about 350 people in my guild if you factor in alts, and I'm absolutely postive most of them either never enter a dungeon or fractal or only enter them when absolutely necessary and very often they're carried through that content.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

And yet, some of them do Strike Missions without an issue.

[Vayne.8563]

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:And yet, some of them do Strike Missions without an issue.

Some people solo dungeons with an issue but that doesn't mean anything because the bulk of the population doesn't. I'm assuming casuals are the bulk of the population so the question is do the bulk of casals do Strike Missions without an issue. I'd say the casuals that do strike missions are probably outliers. That's my guess. I might be wrong...but I might be right too.

[Ayrilana.1396]

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:And yet, some of them do Strike Missions without an issue.

Some people solo dungeons with an issue but that doesn't mean anything because the bulk of the population doesn't. I'm assuming casuals are the bulk of the population so the question is do the bulk of casals do Strike Missions without an issue. I'd say the casuals that do strike missions are probably outliers. That's my guess. I might be wrong...but I might be right too.

Or they don't bother to do them at all because they don't want to do them and it has nothing to do about whether or not they'd have any issues if they were to do them.

[Vayne.8563]

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:And yet, some of them do Strike Missions without an issue.

Some people solo dungeons with an issue but that doesn't mean anything because the bulk of the population doesn't. I'm assuming casuals are the bulk of the population so the question is do the bulk of casals do Strike Missions without an issue. I'd say the casuals that do strike missions are probably outliers. That's my guess. I might be wrong...but I might be right too.

Or they don't bother to do them at all because they don't want to do them and it has nothing to do about whether or not they'd have any issues if they were to do them.

Thanks. This is the boat I'm in.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

Not sure what that has to do with your Guild members, unless you are saying some of them solo dungeons, and therefore aren't that casual.

[Vayne.8563]

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:Not sure what that has to do with your Guild members, unless you are saying some of them solo dungeons, and therefore aren't that casual.

I'm really not sure what it is you don't understand. You're implying some people are doing this with no problem. That's undoubtedly true. You didn't mention my guld members in your post, so I'm not sure where that came from. Yes there are people in my guild who can solo dungeons btw. Hell even I can solo some dungeons.

I don't like strike missions because I have no interest in them, and I'm pretty sure most of my guild doesn't either, as in the vast majority. Assuming that casual people are relatively evenly represented in my guild, that would be that the vast majority of casuals aren't interested in Strike missions. It's not even necessarily because it's too hard. It's because that type of content doesn't interest them.

You're trying to use a strawman argument to change what I'm saying. So I'll say it again.

It is my belief that the vast majority of casuals don't like and won't run strike missions for a variety of reasons. I'm not even sure that skill is the main reason.

As I've said before I have the skill to raid I just don't enjoy raiding. I believe a lot of people are in my boat.

[Randulf.7614]

The more I hear about your Guild, the more - to me - it sounds like a big anomaly and unlikely one replicated across the game. In 20 years of MMO gaming, I've rarely seen any sizable groups utterly uninterested in ever going near instanced content of any kind. Most so called "casuals" as people seem to like calling us are generally happy to do them, but either lack the initial courage to go in on their own or prefer to do them with friend groups or guilds. After that most seem quite happy to group instance play whatever form it comes in - win or lose. That applies to GW2 from my observations across many guilds and groups of players and I've played with people who don't even understand the trait system who are still happy to join in group content.

There will be players who dislike it it, but I have seen little to support the suggestion most dislike them. We even have Andrew Gray's statement that they are doing this because players want that easier route in. And that ultimately has come from players. Ultimately the barriers to instanced content have never to my knowledge been skewed towards disliking them. There are other barriers and those are the ones Anet are trying to break down to make it easier for players and then reward them for their time.

So your guild may not like them, but they seem very much like outliers. But, then again we can only rely solely on your word for it since we don't have them speaking for themselves.

So yeah, they could add extra meta options - and I think everyone was OK with that idea that from page one. But, I'm def not in agreement that the wider playerbase wont do the Strikes out of pure dislike and disdain which seems to be the crux of the issue you have. Those less experienced with them may well end up doing them with friends or guilds and having fun that way. They may then get better or just get the itch to do more with the same group(s). Mission accomplished if so.

[Vayne.8563]

@"Randulf.7614" said:The more I hear about your Guild, the more - to me - it sounds like a big anomaly and unlikely one replicated across the game. In 20 years of MMO gaming, I've rarely seen any sizable groups utterly uninterested in ever going near instanced content of any kind. Most so called "casuals" as people seem to like calling us are generally happy to do them, but either lack the initial courage to go in on their own or prefer to do them with friend groups or guilds. After that most seem quite happy to group instance play whatever form it comes in - win or lose. That applies to GW2 from my observations across many guilds and groups of players and I've played with people who don't even understand the trait system who are still happy to join in group content.

There will be players who dislike it it, but I have seen little to support the suggestion most dislike them. We even have Andrew Gray's statement that they are doing this because players want that easier route in. And that ultimately has come from players. Ultimately the barriers to instanced content have never to my knowledge been skewed towards disliking them. There are other barriers and those are the ones Anet are trying to break down to make it easier for players and then reward them for their time.

So your guild may not like them, but they seem very much like outliers. But, then again we can only rely solely on your word for it since we don't have them speaking for themselves.

So yeah, they could add extra meta options - and I think everyone was OK with that idea that from page one. But, I'm def not in agreement that the wider playerbase wont do the Strikes out of pure dislike and disdain which seems to be the crux of the issue you have. Those less experienced with them will prob end up doing them with friends or guilds and having fun that way. They may then get better or just get the itch to do more with the same group(s). Mission accomplished if so.

@"Randulf.7614" said:The more I hear about your Guild, the more - to me - it sounds like a big anomaly and unlikely one replicated across the game. In 20 years of MMO gaming, I've rarely seen any sizable groups utterly uninterested in ever going near instanced content of any kind. Most so called "casuals" as people seem to like calling us are generally happy to do them, but either lack the initial courage to go in on their own or prefer to do them with friend groups or guilds. After that most seem quite happy to group instance play whatever form it comes in - win or lose. That applies to GW2 from my observations across many guilds and groups of players and I've played with people who don't even understand the trait system who are still happy to join in group content.

There will be players who dislike it it, but I have seen little to support the suggestion most dislike them. We even have Andrew Gray's statement that they are doing this because players want that easier route in. And that ultimately has come from players. Ultimately the barriers to instanced content have never to my knowledge been skewed towards disliking them. There are other barriers and those are the ones Anet are trying to break down to make it easier for players and then reward them for their time.

So your guild may not like them, but they seem very much like outliers. But, then again we can only rely solely on your word for it since we don't have them speaking for themselves.

So yeah, they could add extra meta options - and I think everyone was OK with that idea that from page one. But, I'm def not in agreement that the wider playerbase wont do the Strikes out of pure dislike and disdain which seems to be the crux of the issue you have. Those less experienced with them will prob end up doing them with friends or guilds and having fun that way. They may then get better or just get the itch to do more with the same group(s). Mission accomplished if so.

My guild is not an anomoly if you count solo players in MMOs which make up a fairly sizeable portion of the MMO population according to many different devs across the years. Plenty of people solo MMOs. And there are guilds for solo players. Most of my guild, except for the core, spend most of their time soloing stuff. Which is fine by me, because I don't care. They use the guild for gathering, and buffs. The core players, probably about a hundred of us, are there many times a week and some of them do instanced content, including me...but it's not why we necessarily play games, and it's not necessarily why we play this MMO. The feeling I get from a lot of games I played is that here are the rewards so this is what we have to do to get them. Because most MMOs lock gear behind dungeons and raids that's what most people do. Right up until they burn out on raids and give up MMOs.

This MMO launched with multiple paths to best in slot gear and a lot of people, including me, are here because of that. Like Guild Wars 1, I don't have to do dungeons to get top gear and I can CHOOSE to do dungeons if I want to. Once you alter the equation that way a lot more people will choose not to do dungeons.

Surely you couldn't have escaped the number of times over the years we saw people complaining that the last step of the personal story was a dungeon.

[Vilin.8056]

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:Not sure what that has to do with your Guild members, unless you are saying some of them solo dungeons, and therefore aren't that casual.

I'm really not sure what it is you don't understand. You're implying some people are doing this with no problem. That's undoubtedly true. You didn't mention my guld members in your post, so I'm not sure where that came from. Yes there are people in my guild who can solo dungeons btw. Hell even I can solo some dungeons.

I don't like strike missions because I have no interest in them, and I'm pretty sure most of my guild doesn't either, as in the vast majority. Assuming that casual people are relatively evenly represented in my guild, that would be that the vast majority of casuals aren't interested in Strike missions. It's not even necessarily because it's too hard. It's because that type of content doesn't interest them.

You're trying to use a strawman argument to change what I'm saying. So I'll say it again.

It is my belief that the vast majority of casuals don't like and won't run strike missions for a variety of reasons. I'm not even sure that skill is the main reason.

As I've said before I have the skill to raid I just don't enjoy raiding. I believe a lot of people are in my boat.

Again, you do not speak for the majority here, that kind of self acclaimed statement feels somehow offensive to our community.

As the thread goes, the central issue of this problem is no longer Strike Mission, but rather your own preference.Strike Mission or not, there will always be something some people don't like about in any meta achievements, if skill isn't a barrier, your disinterest about the content is your own choice, and developers simply need not build a wall around it. Achievements are built for the motivated, not the other way around.

We do have a large easy going community that doesn't like to get too devoted to contents, for the most of us, this is never a problem either, strike mission or not,the whole meta achievement takes too much time and devotion in all living story contents for them in the first place. What YOU want does not represent what they like either.

Therefore do us a favor, save us from these 10 forum pages of excuses, it's obvious enough you have trouble handling strike missions (Not interested is so common of an excuse for not capable and afraid of getting expelled) either take in the tips and strategies (as we always do as a community), progress your basic combat training, or simply stay away.

[Vayne.8563]

@Vilin.8056 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:Not sure what that has to do with your Guild members, unless you are saying some of them solo dungeons, and therefore aren't that casual.

I'm really not sure what it is you don't understand. You're implying some people are doing this with no problem. That's undoubtedly true. You didn't mention my guld members in your post, so I'm not sure where that came from. Yes there are people in my guild who can solo dungeons btw. Hell even I can solo some dungeons.

I don't like strike missions because I have no interest in them, and I'm pretty sure most of my guild doesn't either, as in the vast majority. Assuming that casual people are relatively evenly represented in my guild, that would be that the vast majority of casuals aren't interested in Strike missions. It's not even necessarily because it's too hard. It's because that type of content doesn't interest them.

You're trying to use a strawman argument to change what I'm saying. So I'll say it again.

It is my belief that the vast majority of casuals don't like and won't run strike missions for a variety of reasons. I'm not even sure that skill is the main reason.

As I've said before I have the skill to raid I just don't enjoy raiding. I believe a lot of people are in my boat.

Again, you do not speak for the majority here, that kind of self acclaimed statement feels somehow offensive to our community.

As the thread goes, the central issue of this problem is no longer Strike Mission, but rather your own preference.Strike Mission or not, there will always be something some people don't like about in any meta achievements, if skill isn't a barrier, your disinterest about the content is your own choice, and developers simply need not build a wall around it. Achievements are built for the motivated, not the other way around.

We do have a large easy going community that doesn't like to get too devoted to contents, for the most of us, this is never a problem either, strike mission or not,the whole meta achievement takes too much time and devotion in all living story contents for them in the first place. What

YOU

want does not represent what they like either.

Therefore do us a favor, save us from these 10 forum pages of excuses, it's obvious enough you have trouble handling strike missions (Not interested is so common of an excuse for not capable and afraid of getting expelled) either take in the tips and strategies (as we always do as a community), progress your basic combat training, or simply stay away.

I believe that my thoughts on strike missions align with the majority of players. I don't speak for them as in I'm their spokesperson but it doesn't mean what I'm saying is wrong. That's not in any way offense to the communiity. If you believe that there are more PvPers than PvEers that would be your belief and stating that isn't offensive to the community. But you'd probably be incorrect, even if you believed it. I might very well be incorrect in my belief, but I don't think so. Certainly nothing I've seen makes me think that I am.

It's not just about personal preference so much as how I view the game. I feel like something I enjoyed has been taken away from me, and I have every right to post about it. The strawman argument here is about whether I'm in a majority or not. And it is a strawman because my argument is valid whether I am or I'm not. If ENOUGH people feel that they're being annoyed by this, it will have a carry on effect to the game. Anet will have these numbers, eventually, we won't. What they do in the future will inform us if i'm correct. If they keep doing this zone after zone obviously I'm wrong and their data has shown it. If they change it back to what it was, then I'm probably right.

I don't have hard data to prove that most of the population is casual though I strongly believe it. I don't have hard data that most casuals avoid instanced ten man content as a rule, but I strongly believe that.

I've seen zero evidence to prove otherwise.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

@"Vayne.8563" said:

The three or four people in my guild who don't mind them are the people who already raid. The rest of us tried and few and thought pass. But you can't pass. Shrugs.

Sorry but I"m saying my guild has no interest in them at all, but they're inserting them into content many of us regularly do. They're designed to increase particiipation in raids which many of us have no interest in doing.

I tried not to specifically call out some statements, but when you say things that just aren't true, I suppose I must.

I don't have any problem with the Strike Missions, and I've never set foot in a Raid. I am one of your Guild Members, and I know others in your Guild that don't have an issue with Strike Missions.

Please be careful when generalizing to make your points. Thank you.

[Vayne.8563]

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

@"Vayne.8563" said:

The three or four people in my guild who don't mind them are the people who already raid. The rest of us tried and few and thought pass. But you can't pass. Shrugs.

Sorry but I"m saying my guild has no interest in them at all, but they're inserting them into content many of us regularly do. They're designed to increase particiipation in raids which many of us have no interest in doing.

I tried not to specifically call out some statements, but when you say things that just aren't true, I suppose I must.

I don't have any problem with the Strike Missions, and I've never set foot in a Raid. I am one of your Guild Members, and I know others in your Guild that don't have an issue with Strike Missions.

Please be careful when generalizing to make your points. Thank you.

I've spoke to dozens of people in the guild over this. Tell me how many people do you think in that guild are going to do strike missions or care about them? What's the purpose in including them in a meta that before they could get without doing ten man instanced content. There's a slow rumble of discontent. You may not have noticed it because you're barely ever repping and when you are, you're not talking to us. I'm in discord all day every day and I talk to a lot of people in this guild. You can call that generalizing if you like. Shrugs.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

Hey, I'm not the one that stated absolute facts about the Guild Members. I almost always play Invisible, so I'm sorry you can't see me repping.I tried talking to the Guild, but you weren't happy with my connection, so I stopped. No matter.

As I said previously, I don't care whether Strike Missions are part of Meta Achievements, or not. I do care when you speak for me.

[Vilin.8056]

@Vayne.8563 said:I believe that my thoughts on strike missions align with the majority of players. I don't speak for them as in I'm their spokesperson but it doesn't mean what I'm saying is wrong. That's not in any way offense to the communiity. If you believe that there are more PvPers than PvEers that would be your belief and stating that isn't offensive to the community. But you'd probably be incorrect, even if you believed it. I might very well be incorrect in my belief, but I don't think so. Certainly nothing I've seen makes me think that I am.

It's not just about personal preference so much as how I view the game. I feel like something I enjoyed has been taken away from me, and I have every right to post about it. The strawman argument here is about whether I'm in a majority or not. And it is a strawman because my argument is valid whether I am or I'm not. If ENOUGH people feel that they're being annoyed by this, it will have a carry on effect to the game. Anet will have these numbers, eventually, we won't. What they do in the future will inform us if i'm correct. If they keep doing this zone after zone obviously I'm wrong and their data has shown it. If they change it back to what it was, then I'm probably right.

I don't have hard data to prove that most of the population is casual though I strongly believe it. I don't have hard data that most casuals avoid instanced ten man content as a rule, but I strongly believe that.

I've seen zero evidence to prove otherwise.

Your thought towards Strike Missions may somehow align with the majority of players but that doesn't meant your thought towards Meta Achievement or how people should approach them do also represent the majority of players, therefore you're wrong.

While I do respect everyone should have their own voice, I do find this overly vague yet convenient labeling groups of people behind your own objection to be offensive every time the thread is brought up. So what am I, the 5% elite minority just because I do strike mission and casual raid with guildies sometimes?

Games in general, will always be catering the mainstream of gamers, which tends to age towards the young and curious. The declining of MMOs has many factors, but GW2 players has becoming too old of age, too lazy, too casual and too unmotivated, sometimes it's simply an symptom of players becoming the past generation, like this thread.

[Vayne.8563]

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:Hey, I'm not the one that stated absolute facts about the Guild Members. I almost always play Invisible, so I'm sorry you can't see me repping.I tried talking to the Guild, but you weren't happy with my connection, so I stopped. No matter.

As I said previously, I don't care whether Strike Missions are part of Meta Achievements, or not. I do care when you speak for me.

I'm not speaking for you, but for the guld as a whole. That doesn't mean 10 people in the guild won't disagree but some of the raiders who come into voice agree with me, because they see how others are affected.

Your argument is I'm invislbe most of the time and don't really participate much but I spoke to a few guys. Obviously not 100% of the guild is going to agree on everything. However, there are also people in the guild who do nothing but WvW, and people in the guild who mostly PvP and they don't care either. The bulk of the guild are open world PvEers and they're the ones that have an interest in this. And of those people, yes, I feel like I can speak for the bulk of them, because i talk to the bulk of the regulars.

[Vayne.8563]

@Vilin.8056 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:I believe that my thoughts on strike missions align with the majority of players. I don't speak for them as in I'm their spokesperson but it doesn't mean what I'm saying is wrong. That's not in any way offense to the communiity. If you believe that there are more PvPers than PvEers that would be your belief and stating that isn't offensive to the community. But you'd probably be incorrect, even if you believed it. I might very well be incorrect in my belief, but I don't think so. Certainly nothing I've seen makes me think that I am.

It's not just about personal preference so much as how I view the game. I feel like something I enjoyed has been taken away from me, and I have every right to post about it. The strawman argument here is about whether I'm in a majority or not. And it is a strawman because my argument is valid whether I am or I'm not. If ENOUGH people feel that they're being annoyed by this, it will have a carry on effect to the game. Anet will have these numbers, eventually, we won't. What they do in the future will inform us if i'm correct. If they keep doing this zone after zone obviously I'm wrong and their data has shown it. If they change it back to what it was, then I'm probably right.

I don't have hard data to prove that most of the population is casual though I strongly believe it. I don't have hard data that most casuals avoid instanced ten man content as a rule, but I strongly believe that.

I've seen zero evidence to prove otherwise.

Your thought towards Strike Missions may somehow align with the majority of players but that doesn't meant your thought towards Meta Achievement or how people should approach them do also represent the majority of players, therefore you're wrong.

While I do respect everyone should have their own voice, I do find this overly vague yet convenient labeling groups of people behind your own objection to be offensive every time the thread is brought up. So what am I, the 5% elite minority just because I do strike mission and casual raid with guildies sometimes?

Games in general, will always be catering the mainstream of gamers, which tends to age towards the young and curious. The declining of MMOs has many factors, but GW2 players has becoming too old of age, too lazy, too casual and too unmotivated, sometimes it's simply an symptom of players becoming the past generation, like this thread.

It may or may not be aligned iwth the majority of people who do meta achievements but I still could be right. Right now less than 1% of the population of GW 2 efficiency has finihsed hte meta achievement. By the time the next episode comes out, we'll have a better idea, but if it's less than 2% it'll be one of the least done metas of all time by about 100%. That's a pretty big statement.

Which is why I keep saying my opinion doesn't matter, but Anet will have the numbers and I believe they'll back up what I'm saying.

Edit: BTW, the age of the average computer gamer is somewhere in the mid-30s so you know.

[Vilin.8056]

@Vayne.8563 said:It may or may not be aligned iwth the majority of people who do meta achievements but I still could be right. Right now less than 1% of the population of GW 2 efficiency has finihsed hte meta achievement. By the time the next episode comes out, we'll have a better idea, but if it's less than 2% it'll be one of the least done metas of all time by about 100%. That's a pretty big statement.

Which is why I keep saying my opinion doesn't matter, but Anet will have the numbers and I believe they'll back up what I'm saying.

Edit: BTW, the age of the average computer gamer is somewhere in the mid-30s so you know.

Again you're narrowing the community into your own point of interest.

Why should completing Meta Achievement be counted as a necessity in the first place? Most players I know never feel the need of finishing every point of it in every living story. Anet brought out new content, new boss, new skins, and we come feel the thrill, collect the reward, enjoy the chatter, and learn something along the way with friends and guildies. That's what kept us going.

So I have done raids, done strike missions, but never completed any meta, am I the 98% or the 5%?

And yes, we're getting too old.

[Vayne.8563]

@Vilin.8056 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:It may or may not be aligned iwth the majority of people who do meta achievements but I still could be right. Right now less than 1% of the population of GW 2 efficiency has finihsed hte meta achievement. By the time the next episode comes out, we'll have a better idea, but if it's less than 2% it'll be one of the least done metas of all time by about 100%. That's a pretty big statement.

Which is why I keep saying my opinion doesn't matter, but Anet will have the numbers and I believe they'll back up what I'm saying.

Edit: BTW, the age of the average computer gamer is somewhere in the mid-30s so you know.

Again you're narrowing the community into your own point of interest.

Why should completing Meta Achievement be counted as a necessity in the first place? Most players I know never feel the need of finishing every point of it in every living story. Anet brought out new content, new boss, new skins, and we come feel the thrill, collect the reward, enjoy the chatter, and learn something along the way with friends and guildies. That's what kept us going.

So I have done raids, done strike missions, but never completed any meta, am I the 98% or the 5%?

And yes, we're getting too old.

I'm not doing any such thing. I'm saying ANet will know from data, and they'll make a choice. I'm saying it's my belief that I'm part of a number of people who are annoyed by strike missions generally and wish they'd go away. I said we'll see how it affects meta completion rates and Anet will make a decision based on that. I dont' work for Anet. I don't know for sure. I don't have any data except my beliefs based on my experience.

Why are you so put off by someone expressing their beliefs?

[Vilin.8056]

@"Vayne.8563" said:I'm not doing any such thing. I'm saying ANet will know from data, and they'll make a choice. I'm saying it's my belief that I'm part of a number of people who are annoyed by strike missions generally and wish they'd go away. I said we'll see how it affects meta completion rates and Anet will make a decision based on that. I dont' work for Anet. I don't know for sure. I don't have any data except my beliefs based on my experience.

Why are you so put off by someone expressing their beliefs?

I'm ok with express your beliefs, leave "Majority" and "I'm Right" out of it.Else we too will be expressing our beliefs that you're wrong, especially with this thread and its negativity bumping up for weeks.

[Vayne.8563]

@Vilin.8056 said:

@"Vayne.8563" said:I'm not doing any such thing. I'm saying ANet will know from data, and they'll make a choice. I'm saying it's my belief that I'm part of a number of people who are annoyed by strike missions generally and wish they'd go away. I said we'll see how it affects meta completion rates and Anet will make a decision based on that. I dont' work for Anet. I don't know for sure. I don't have any data except my beliefs based on my experience.

Why are you so put off by someone expressing their beliefs?

I'm ok with express your beliefs, leave "Majority" and "I'm Right" out of it.Else we too will be expressing our beliefs that you're wrong, especially with this thread and its negativity bumping up for weeks.

I'm sorry I believe I'm either part of a majority or at least part of a large enough group to make a difference in how the game should be changed moving forward. Either the dev numbers will bear out what I say or it won't. I won't stop believing that there are more people affected than you think.

[Vilin.8056]

@Vayne.8563 said:I'm sorry I believe I'm either part of a majority or at least part of a large enough group to make a difference in how the game should be changed moving forward. Either the dev numbers will bear out what I say or it won't. I won't stop believing that there are more people affected than you think.Yet the Irony of pleading the game to be changed moving backward by cutting contents off the grid. Yet still making a stance representing the majority.I think the mentality is clear enough here, what needs changing isn't really the game.

[Vayne.8563]

@Vilin.8056 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:I'm sorry I believe I'm either part of a majority or at least part of a large enough group to make a difference in how the game should be changed moving forward. Either the dev numbers will bear out what I say or it won't. I won't stop believing that there are more people affected than you think.Yet the Irony of pleading the game to be changed moving

backward

by cutting contents off the grid. Yet still making a stance representing the majority.I think the mentality is clear enough here, what needs changing isn't really the game.

There's no irony here. I suggest this is bad for the game, you think this is good for the game. One of us is probably right. Anet will have data and they will make decision based on that data. Where is this irony you speak of?

I mean you're claiming as fact that making a change is moving backwards. Content isn't cut off the grid. I'm not asking strike missions to be removed from the game. I'm asking for them to be removed from the zone meta. How is that exactly removing content from the game? And yes, I think most people who have been doing zone rewards all along will end up agreeing and I believe the stats of how many finish will show that in the long run.

[maddoctor.2738]

@Vayne.8563 said:It is my belief that the vast majority of casuals don't like and won't run strike missions for a variety of reasons. I'm not even sure that skill is the main reason.

Which is irrelevant to the discussion. Maybe you should revisit your opening post to remember what the topic is about.