Jump to content
  • Sign Up

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


Vayne.8563

Recommended Posts

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@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.

Well it can go to my discussion surely if, as I believe, mostly people who self-identify as casuals do map meta rewards. It's surely not a hard core achievement, or hasn't been seen that way until now. Most of my guild, the vast majority, self-identifies as casual. I tell them up front it's a casual guild. I tell them up front that we're PvE centric. And I tell them up front that we don't raid so it's no surprise that most of us have similar view on the game, at least those that actually participate in the guild.

Of those self identified casuals, most of us are achievement hunters in one way or another, including for the most part zone metas. That's something the people I play with look forward to. And I'm telling you if we continue to get strike missions in zone metas moving forward, most of those people won't do those zone metas. It'll be less for them to do. That's been my argument all along.

You're not drawing the lines perhaps, but that doesn't mean the lines aren't there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Vayne.8563 said:

@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.

Well it can go to my discussion surely if, as I believe, mostly people who self-identify as casuals do map meta rewards. It's surely not a hard core achievement, or hasn't been seen that way until now. Most of my guild, the vast majority, self-identifies as casual. I tell them up front it's a casual guild. I tell them up front that we're PvE centric. And I tell them up front that we don't raid so it's no surprise that most of us have similar view on the game, at least those that actually participate in the guild.

You have something to prove that those that self-identify as casuals do map meta achievements? And that "hardcore" players do not go for map meta achievements? Other than your guild of course. You must have something valid to base your argument on.

Of those self identified casuals, most of us are achievement hunters in one way or another, including for the most part zone metas. That's something the people I play with look forward to. And I'm telling you if we continue to get strike missions in zone metas moving forward, most of those people won't do those zone metas. It'll be less for them to do. That's been my argument all along.

If, and that's a big if, most of the self-identified casuals in the game were achievement hunters then the self-identified casuals are a tiny minority of the player base and not the majority. If the majority did go for map meta achievements, then the majority of the population wouldn't have less than 300 achievement points. One of the two is false:a) The majority is self-identified casualsb) The majority of self-identified casuals go for map meta achievementsand I think we both know which one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:Did you say this?

"The three or four people in my guild who don't mind them are the people who already raid.""I"m [sic] saying my guild has no interest in them at all..."

Not true.

It doesn't matter. One, the Devs won't read a thread this long, or this circular. Two, I hope you get what you want.

Good luck.

Okay we have 8 officers in the guild and 100% of them are against it. Pretty much everyone I play with, and it's a lot of people hunt achievements as pretty much their man source of playing the game. It's what most of us do. That is active people in the guild who play.

Guys who joined the guild three months ago and logged in twice, I never likely spoke to, because they never played the game.

Would you like me to go to each person in the guild who I play with regularly and have them all log in and post in this thread? I mean I could, but you really should take my word for it. You could even log into the guild and I could introduce you to them one by one if that's what you want.

You don't have to believe somethhing is true for something to be true.

Edit: There are 46 people in my guild who are over 20k achievement points. They didn't get them ignoring achievements. They focus on achievements. Yet when I tried to get 10 people to raid, I couldn't do it. We couldn't get ten people interested enough in raiding to log in every week. It wasn't our type of content. A few of us tried the Strike Missions and for the people I tried them with (ten at a time mind you), they were too much like raids and we don't get the interest. But all of those people I played with are interested in zone metas and achievements in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@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.

Well it can go to my discussion surely if, as I believe, mostly people who self-identify as casuals do map meta rewards. It's surely not a hard core achievement, or hasn't been seen that way until now. Most of my guild, the vast majority, self-identifies as casual. I tell them up front it's a casual guild. I tell them up front that we're PvE centric. And I tell them up front that we don't raid so it's no surprise that most of us have similar view on the game, at least those that actually participate in the guild.

You have something to prove that those that self-identify as casuals do map meta achievements? And that "hardcore" players do not go for map meta achievements? Other than your guild of course. You must have something valid to base your argument on.

Of those self identified casuals, most of us are achievement hunters in one way or another, including for the most part zone metas. That's something the people I play with look forward to. And I'm telling you if we continue to get strike missions in zone metas moving forward, most of those people won't do those zone metas. It'll be less for them to do. That's been my argument all along.

If, and that's a big if, most of the self-identified casuals in the game were achievement hunters then the self-identified casuals are a tiny minority of the player base and not the majority. If the
majority
did go for map meta achievements, then the majority of the population wouldn't have less than 300 achievement points. One of the two is false:a) The majority is self-identified casualsb) The majority of self-identified casuals go for map meta achievementsand I think we both know which one.

As I said and I'll say it again. If Anet sees that enough people don't complete this meta I believe it will change. If they see less people coming into the zone to do stuff other than the meta it might change too. People will obviously keep doing the meta, because that's what people do. But overall I believe this meta will be less pursued than other others. How many people will play less? You and I don't know. Anet will have a better idea.

And based on that they either will or won't change it. Nothing you or I say in this thread will make a lick of difference. I've accomplished my goal already. I've made sure Anet is surely aware of the issue from my point of view. They'll look at the data and decide. If they decide not to include strike missions in metas moving forward, we'll have a better idea of just how many people were affected. I know not only haven't I finished the meta, but because of it I've spent far far less time in the new zone than previous zones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Vilin.8056 said:

@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.

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.

You make the same mistake with your self acclaimed statement because you do not speak for the community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Create a casual run for the strike missions then and specify it as being casual.

People are well within their right to request people that join the groups that they created to meet certain DPS thresholds.

Strikes are very much casual content, or at the very least, the three that rotate weekly. Whispers is debatable but doable by randoms with no raid experience. It just depends on their ability to pay attention.

Strikes aren't casual content. Strikes are easier instanced content, but they're not casual because very often casuals don't organize. And the organization is the problem here. It's something many don't play a game to do. I will organize stuff myself, but I know my guild saw what raids did to them (as in caused a schism between better players and not so better players) and said screw this here we go again.

You can say this is casual content, but it's really not. At the very least you might say even if the early ones were more casual, the later strike missions are definitely not.

They're casual content. You don't need to organize for them unless going for all of the bonus chests. You wait in LFG just like you would for dungeons and fractals.
The only difference is that it takes a little longer since you need 10 players instead of 5.

That's exactly what makes them NOT casual. If you have to stand around and wait for players to organize into a team to do content, that is the opposite of casual friendly content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:It has already been proven players doing the meta is not a majority. He also thinks every guild is just like his and uses a vague term like casual which includes 20 minute a day players who probably don't do strikes cause they don't do much at all to prove he's the majority.

That might be true, but it's not relevant anyways. Whatever majority you want to argue doesn't make the point any less true. Y'all fixated so badly on whatever this majority debate is. It don't matter. We are at a stage in the game where Anet can't 'experiment' all that much with how they present content to players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Create a casual run for the strike missions then and specify it as being casual.

People are well within their right to request people that join the groups that they created to meet certain DPS thresholds.

Strikes are very much casual content, or at the very least, the three that rotate weekly. Whispers is debatable but doable by randoms with no raid experience. It just depends on their ability to pay attention.

Strikes aren't casual content. Strikes are easier instanced content, but they're not casual because very often casuals don't organize. And the organization is the problem here. It's something many don't play a game to do. I will organize stuff myself, but I know my guild saw what raids did to them (as in caused a schism between better players and not so better players) and said screw this here we go again.

You can say this is casual content, but it's really not. At the very least you might say even if the early ones were more casual, the later strike missions are definitely not.

They're casual content. You don't need to organize for them unless going for all of the bonus chests. You wait in LFG just like you would for dungeons and fractals.
The only difference is that it takes a little longer since you need 10 players instead of 5.

That's exactly what makes them NOT casual. If you have to stand around and wait for players to organize into a team to do content, that is the opposite of casual friendly content.

In your logic then Guild missions are NOT casual friendly content as well?In fact, pretty much all meta achievements are not casual friendly in this regard, case solved.

Again, the case isn't really about Anet in general, but simply you don't want to do it. Personal preferences of the few and unwilling are irrelevant in this matter, and yes, we do need stop including the majority of the community into personal opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Vayne.8563 & @Swagger.1459

Yeeeperz!!! PvE was apparently the hook, line and sinker (hehe no pun intended) to teach us to "WANT" to play Competitive Game Modes. It's partly to comply with "Player Autonomy" and get us to the chosen mode of ArenaNet: Competitive Play! They built an AA and some would say AAA game off PvE but then said...nope! Very sad day for PvE'rs and Achievement hunters, we'll need to get used to unfinished Story Journal segments :'( incomplete collection sets and pray to the RNG Gods that's at least once every 5 years we'll get that drop that's part of an achievement or a collection!

The Game Modes don't play well together, lets us play the mode we like 100%!!!! RAIDs have their reward System, put strike rewards there and give us back our PvE rewards!

LOLZ! I went to Bjora Marches and all I got was this Fishing pole! At least I can pretend to fish now ;) I poke (omg srsly!?) fun.

Honestly Arenanet, we have loved your game since 2005. It seems 2020 might be all we get?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kudos to Vayne for starting this thread. And kudos, also, for saying nearly everything that's been on my mind since the achievements for this chapter were released.

What do we all have in common? We all want to play the game using the modes we enjoy most. Good intentions from ANet, but this is not the way. I want to see GW2 succeed, and I applaud every game mode that interests and challenges all players and prospective players. I like having an incentive to try new things. But making the Shadow In The Ice Mastery achievement reward dependent on mixing the modes (including strike missions) with no option of substituting an equivalent participation puts me, a loyal player, in a very negative space.

I'll be honest and a bit selfish here...I like the varied game modes. It gives L33t and/or competitive players a source of enjoyment and reduces the negativity in my map chat.

Please tell me, what category do I fit best? I log in every day (except a few maternity days off), do a few dailies (in different modes, mind you, but I prefer PvE). I have sunk some money into gems, and I love finishing collections & achievements, acquiring new skins, crafting, "fashion" wars, etc. I play the game to release a little steam, relax, and make some online friends. My screen time is limited (remember that maternity leave?), and I have a full time job. I play maybe 15-25 hours a week, across multiple accounts. I've never been good at jumping puzzles (however the light puzzles are much more fun for me). Maybe someone could offer a spiffy, stereotyped, category title for me? :)

My interests have changed along with my time availability, among other things, and are different from when I began playing GW in 2005. I want to achieve goals, but my hands are tied when it comes to Shadow in the Ice, which saddens me a great deal. I don't enjoy Strike and Raids. Maybe I'm good enough, maybe not. I don't have time or patience, and it's not my thing. I'd rather grind than suffer the RNG of trying to land in a fun group to Strike or Raid with. Almost all attempts of mine have been fruitless so far. It's either toxic, or takes more time than I can commit to, to be successful.

My husband and I have invested a great deal of time and money into this game, and we've also invested some hopes and dreams that when our little ones are old enough, this will be a source of entertainment for the whole family. We want to see it continue to succeed.

As Vayne has said, if ANet continues this strategy of leading players towards raiding, they're going to lose player interest rather than increase it. I liked an excellent suggestion I read somewhere between page 2 and 5 of this thread...maybe add more achievements to old maps as new content is released, to allow players to earn the reward w/o doing strike missions?

I have a lot less interest in the game when I am thinking ,"I'd like to, but..." Makes me want to channel my inner Sylvari...start a r.l. garden. My little ones are already mining precious ores (aka rocks) in our backyard. I have a kitchen and a sewing machine, and I'm pretty good a wielding a musical instrument, too. I suppose I have everything in r.l. that GW2 offers, except gliding, mounts, mobs of unfriendly creatures (perhaps bills, taxes, and traffic fit that description?), and large, shiny weapons. Don't take away my virtual rewards, ANet!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Vilin.8056 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Create a casual run for the strike missions then and specify it as being casual.

People are well within their right to request people that join the groups that they created to meet certain DPS thresholds.

Strikes are very much casual content, or at the very least, the three that rotate weekly. Whispers is debatable but doable by randoms with no raid experience. It just depends on their ability to pay attention.

Strikes aren't casual content. Strikes are easier instanced content, but they're not casual because very often casuals don't organize. And the organization is the problem here. It's something many don't play a game to do. I will organize stuff myself, but I know my guild saw what raids did to them (as in caused a schism between better players and not so better players) and said screw this here we go again.

You can say this is casual content, but it's really not. At the very least you might say even if the early ones were more casual, the later strike missions are definitely not.

They're casual content. You don't need to organize for them unless going for all of the bonus chests. You wait in LFG just like you would for dungeons and fractals.
The only difference is that it takes a little longer since you need 10 players instead of 5.

That's exactly what makes them NOT casual. If you have to stand around and wait for players to organize into a team to do content, that is the opposite of casual friendly content.

In your logic then Guild missions are NOT casual friendly content as well?

Correct, they aren't ... even by their very nature they are intentionally designed around guild participation, which tends to require a good deal of organization to execute successfully. Of course, whether Guild missions are casual-oriented content or not has NOTHING to do with the post your are replying to or this thread. If you want to debate what is or isn't casual content, feel free to make a separate thread about it.

@Vilin.8056 said:Again, the case isn't really about Anet in general, but simply you don't want to do it.

I don't know what you are talking about. Nothing I said should have given you any indication of what I am and am not willing to do. You should try to follow along better, ESPECIALLY if you are going to accuse someone of having a false agenda and that person is me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Seth Moonshadow.2710 said:@Vayne.8563 & @Swagger.1459

Yeeeperz!!! PvE was apparently the hook, line and sinker (hehe no pun intended) to teach us to "WANT" to play Competitive Game Modes. It's partly to comply with "Player Autonomy" and get us to the chosen mode of ArenaNet: Competitive Play! They built an AA and some would say AAA game off PvE but then said...nope! Very sad day for PvE'rs and Achievement hunters, we'll need to get used to unfinished Story Journal segments :'( incomplete collection sets and pray to the RNG Gods that's at least once every 5 years we'll get that drop that's part of an achievement or a collection!

The Game Modes don't play well together, lets us play the mode we like 100%!!!! RAIDs have their reward System, put strike rewards there and give us back our PvE rewards!

LOLZ! I went to Bjora Marches and all I got was this Fishing pole! At least I can pretend to fish now ;) I poke (omg srsly!?) fun.

Honestly Arenanet, we have loved your game since 2005. It seems 2020 might be all we get?

TY! And I agree with you! And Anet still loves us too, so I have hope!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Obtena.7952 said:

@"Jayden Reese.9542" said:It has already been proven players doing the meta is not a majority. He also thinks every guild is just like his and uses a vague term like casual which includes 20 minute a day players who probably don't do strikes cause they don't do much at all to prove he's the majority.

That might be true, but it's not relevant anyways. Whatever majority you want to argue doesn't make the point any less true. Y'all fixated so badly on whatever this majority debate is. It don't matter. We are at a stage in the game where Anet can't 'experiment' all that much with how they present content to players.

If it's not relevant and it doesn't matter then it shouldn't be coming out as an argument all the time. And when someone is wrong and gets presented with evidence and data to support that their claim is false, they should have the decency to accept it and not play the "Anet has the data" card.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@"Jayden Reese.9542" said:It has already been proven players doing the meta is not a majority. He also thinks every guild is just like his and uses a vague term like casual which includes 20 minute a day players who probably don't do strikes cause they don't do much at all to prove he's the majority.

That might be true, but it's not relevant anyways. Whatever majority you want to argue doesn't make the point any less true. Y'all fixated so badly on whatever this majority debate is. It don't matter. We are at a stage in the game where Anet can't 'experiment' all that much with how they present content to players.

If it's not relevant and it doesn't matter then it shouldn't be coming out as an argument all the time. And when someone is wrong and gets presented with evidence and data to support that their claim is false, they should have the decency to accept it and not play the "Anet has the data" card.

Agreed ... but that doesn't change the fact that the issue stands on it's own without appeals to the masses. To be quite frank, BOTH sides are trying to play this card, so whatever data someone brings forth in the interest to 'proves' someone wrong is derailing the thread. It's not about how many people are affected or not by some singular instance of it .. it's about how Anet serves it's customers. Frankly, EVERYONE is affected by inconsistent offerings; this is just ONE example of MANY ... and anyone that argues they aren't affected by inconsistent offerings is either not being honest or just unaware. If you look at all the times Anet has been inconsistent with how they offer content in all game modes, you bet that most people in this game have been negatively affected by it at some point during the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:It has already been proven players doing the meta is not a majority. He also thinks every guild is just like his and uses a vague term like casual which includes 20 minute a day players who probably don't do strikes cause they don't do much at all to prove he's the majority.

That might be true, but it's not relevant anyways. Whatever majority you want to argue doesn't make the point any less true. Y'all fixated so badly on whatever this majority debate is. It don't matter. We are at a stage in the game where Anet can't 'experiment' all that much with how they present content to players.

If it's not relevant and it doesn't matter then it shouldn't be coming out as an argument all the time. And when someone is wrong and gets presented with evidence and data to support that their claim is false, they should have the decency to accept it and not play the "Anet has the data" card.

Agreed ... but that doesn't change the fact that the issue stands on it's own without appeals to the masses. To be quite frank, BOTH sides are trying to play this card, so whatever data someone brings forth in the interest to 'proves' someone wrong is derailing the thread. It's not about how many people are affected or not. Frankly, EVERYONE is affected by inconsistent offerings; this is just ONE example of MANY. If you look at
all
the times Anet has been inconsistent with how they offer content in
all
game modes, you bet that most people in this game were negatively affected at some point during the game because of it.

One sides has shown numbers to prove it with the data we have and the other side ignores those numbers and thinks the numbers anet has proves him right and uses that as a crutch to energizer bunny this thread

That doesn't change what I said. At best, NO side has whatever data is needed to comprehensively prove whatever you are trying to argue, so it's not a very honest approach to 'lay claim' to some truth that makes the OP's concern invalid; that's just arguing in bad faith, and it needs to stop. Maybe you think your pedantic arguments are meaningful ... they are not.

What IS true is that when Anet offers inconsistent content, SOMEONE is negatively affected by it. When that happens LOTS of time, it affects LOTS of people. When it happens ENOUGH times, it feels like Anet doesn't understand us anymore and can't deliver things we want. Maybe you think that's a GREAT thing to feel misunderstood as a customer ... is that why you are so hard on the OP's POV?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:It has already been proven players doing the meta is not a majority. He also thinks every guild is just like his and uses a vague term like casual which includes 20 minute a day players who probably don't do strikes cause they don't do much at all to prove he's the majority.

That might be true, but it's not relevant anyways. Whatever majority you want to argue doesn't make the point any less true. Y'all fixated so badly on whatever this majority debate is. It don't matter. We are at a stage in the game where Anet can't 'experiment' all that much with how they present content to players.

If it's not relevant and it doesn't matter then it shouldn't be coming out as an argument all the time. And when someone is wrong and gets presented with evidence and data to support that their claim is false, they should have the decency to accept it and not play the "Anet has the data" card.

Agreed ... but that doesn't change the fact that the issue stands on it's own without appeals to the masses. To be quite frank, BOTH sides are trying to play this card, so whatever data someone brings forth in the interest to 'proves' someone wrong is derailing the thread. It's not about how many people are affected or not. Frankly, EVERYONE is affected by inconsistent offerings; this is just ONE example of MANY. If you look at
all
the times Anet has been inconsistent with how they offer content in
all
game modes, you bet that most people in this game were negatively affected at some point during the game because of it.

One sides has shown numbers to prove it with the data we have and the other side ignores those numbers and thinks the numbers anet has proves him right and uses that as a crutch to energizer bunny this thread

That doesn't change what I said. At best, NO side has whatever data is needed to comprehensively prove whatever you are trying to argue, so it's not a very honest approach to 'lay claim' to some truth that makes the OP's concern invalid; that's just arguing in bad faith, and it needs to stop. Maybe you think your pedantic arguments are meaningful ... they are not.

What IS true is that when Anet offers inconsistent content, SOMEONE is negatively affected by it. When that happens LOTS of time, it affects LOTS of people.

We have GWeffeciency if you read the entire thread and You tend to argue pedantic all the time like right now so Idk what you trying to say. Are you trying to say that no one even with numbers can argue something just because we don't have every single number because anet only has that. What exactly are you saying is irrelevant? No one says his concern is invalid and time and time again many said we are fine if they remove strikes from the meta he just circles and circles looking for complete 100 percent agreement.

I'm going to make this simple for you because you seem to be stuck. I'm going to make a statement, you can agree or disagree. It won't have numbers in it to confuse the discussion.

Anet offering inconsistent content to players is bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@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.

Sorry I define guild members as active guild members. That is people who participate with the guld. There are probably a hundred people in the guild that almost no one kows that don't log on enough or rep enough or participate at all. ANd you're right I don't know what those people necessarily think. Of the core guild, that is the people actually playing together as a guild, the idea of having strike missions as an OPTION in the zone meta, or not there at all is pretty much universal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:It has already been proven players doing the meta is not a majority. He also thinks every guild is just like his and uses a vague term like casual which includes 20 minute a day players who probably don't do strikes cause they don't do much at all to prove he's the majority.

That might be true, but it's not relevant anyways. Whatever majority you want to argue doesn't make the point any less true. Y'all fixated so badly on whatever this majority debate is. It don't matter. We are at a stage in the game where Anet can't 'experiment' all that much with how they present content to players.

If it's not relevant and it doesn't matter then it shouldn't be coming out as an argument all the time. And when someone is wrong and gets presented with evidence and data to support that their claim is false, they should have the decency to accept it and not play the "Anet has the data" card.

Agreed ... but that doesn't change the fact that the issue stands on it's own without appeals to the masses. To be quite frank, BOTH sides are trying to play this card, so whatever data someone brings forth in the interest to 'proves' someone wrong is derailing the thread. It's not about how many people are affected or not. Frankly, EVERYONE is affected by inconsistent offerings; this is just ONE example of MANY. If you look at
all
the times Anet has been inconsistent with how they offer content in
all
game modes, you bet that most people in this game were negatively affected at some point during the game because of it.

One sides has shown numbers to prove it with the data we have and the other side ignores those numbers and thinks the numbers anet has proves him right and uses that as a crutch to energizer bunny this thread

That doesn't change what I said. At best, NO side has whatever data is needed to comprehensively prove whatever you are trying to argue, so it's not a very honest approach to 'lay claim' to some truth that makes the OP's concern invalid; that's just arguing in bad faith, and it needs to stop. Maybe you think your pedantic arguments are meaningful ... they are not.

What IS true is that when Anet offers inconsistent content, SOMEONE is negatively affected by it. When that happens LOTS of time, it affects LOTS of people.

We have GWeffeciency if you read the entire thread and You tend to argue pedantic all the time like right now so Idk what you trying to say. Are you trying to say that no one even with numbers can argue something just because we don't have every single number because anet only has that. What exactly are you saying is irrelevant? No one says his concern is invalid and time and time again many said we are fine if they remove strikes from the meta he just circles and circles looking for complete 100 percent agreement.

I'm going to make this simple for you because you seem to be stuck. I'm going to make a statement, you can agree or disagree. It won't have numbers in it to confuse the discussion.

Anet offering inconsistent content to players is bad.

Yeah that's not simple. Inconsistent what? New content is always a new map with new story with new events with new achieves. Is the inconsistent part the strikes tied to meta or sometimes story tied to meta(which I hate more then this dude does strikes) of mind numbing repeat quests. They are pretty consistent at releasing average at best content which is bad and there is consistently a portion who is unhappy which is bad again.

It is ABSOLUTELY that simple. Do not confuse new content with the possible way it can be offered to players in an inconsistent manner ... like what the OP is describing. The fact that you describe the inconsistent part is evidence enough to me that you know WHAT that inconsistency is in this case. You seem to be here as a matter of arguing in bad faith ... for whatever reason I can't imagine.

Honestly, if you don't understand what the OP's problem is, why are you arguing with him, then accusing him of running you in circles? I urge you to go back to page one and see what his complaint is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:It has already been proven players doing the meta is not a majority. He also thinks every guild is just like his and uses a vague term like casual which includes 20 minute a day players who probably don't do strikes cause they don't do much at all to prove he's the majority.

That might be true, but it's not relevant anyways. Whatever majority you want to argue doesn't make the point any less true. Y'all fixated so badly on whatever this majority debate is. It don't matter. We are at a stage in the game where Anet can't 'experiment' all that much with how they present content to players.

If it's not relevant and it doesn't matter then it shouldn't be coming out as an argument all the time. And when someone is wrong and gets presented with evidence and data to support that their claim is false, they should have the decency to accept it and not play the "Anet has the data" card.

Agreed ... but that doesn't change the fact that the issue stands on it's own without appeals to the masses. To be quite frank, BOTH sides are trying to play this card, so whatever data someone brings forth in the interest to 'proves' someone wrong is derailing the thread. It's not about how many people are affected or not. Frankly, EVERYONE is affected by inconsistent offerings; this is just ONE example of MANY. If you look at
all
the times Anet has been inconsistent with how they offer content in
all
game modes, you bet that most people in this game were negatively affected at some point during the game because of it.

One sides has shown numbers to prove it with the data we have and the other side ignores those numbers and thinks the numbers anet has proves him right and uses that as a crutch to energizer bunny this thread

That doesn't change what I said. At best, NO side has whatever data is needed to comprehensively prove whatever you are trying to argue, so it's not a very honest approach to 'lay claim' to some truth that makes the OP's concern invalid; that's just arguing in bad faith, and it needs to stop. Maybe you think your pedantic arguments are meaningful ... they are not.

What IS true is that when Anet offers inconsistent content, SOMEONE is negatively affected by it. When that happens LOTS of time, it affects LOTS of people.

We have GWeffeciency if you read the entire thread and You tend to argue pedantic all the time like right now so Idk what you trying to say. Are you trying to say that no one even with numbers can argue something just because we don't have every single number because anet only has that. What exactly are you saying is irrelevant? No one says his concern is invalid and time and time again many said we are fine if they remove strikes from the meta he just circles and circles looking for complete 100 percent agreement.

I'm going to make this simple for you because you seem to be stuck. I'm going to make a statement, you can agree or disagree. It won't have numbers in it to confuse the discussion.

Anet offering inconsistent content to players is bad.

Yeah that's not simple. Inconsistent what? New content is always a new map with new story with new events with new achieves. Is the inconsistent part the strikes tied to meta or sometimes story tied to meta(which I hate more then this dude does strikes) of mind numbing repeat quests. They are pretty consistent at releasing average at best content which is bad and there is consistently a portion who is unhappy which is bad again.

What is simple is that a change was made and some people don't like that change including many in this thread. That's simple.

And we're not asking for strike mission to be removed from the game. I don't even require them to be removed from the meta. I'm saying options should exist for people who dont' want to do that content to do something else to get the meta. They did this with wintersday by giving 7 options and making you have to do six so you can skip the jumping puzzle.

You're making it sound like this is something riiduclous to ask for. It's very reasonable to ask for. Particularly because zone metas have never asked us to do 10 man instanced content before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Obtena.7952 said:Correct, they aren't ... even by their very nature they are intentionally designed around guild participation, which tends to require a good deal of organization to execute successfully. Of course, whether Guild missions are casual-oriented content or not has NOTHING to do with the post your are replying to or this thread. If you want to debate what is or isn't casual content, feel free to make a separate thread about it.It's the logic you used to define what is casual contents, in which you used to labeling out of any contents that requires "waiting for players organise into groups" from being casual. In this case the whole debate of meta achievements are irrelevant as nearly all living story meta achievements contain activities that require waiting for players to do as such, which makes meta achievement never meant for your definition of casual players.

@Obtena.7952 said:I don't know what you are talking about. Nothing I said should have given you any indication of what I am and am not willing to do. You should try to follow along better, ESPECIALLY if you are going to accuse someone of having a false agenda and that person is me.

This I apologise for falsely pointing onto you, but you should be aware the whole topic is about willing or not willing to do strike mission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@"Jayden Reese.9542" said:It has already been proven players doing the meta is not a majority. He also thinks every guild is just like his and uses a vague term like casual which includes 20 minute a day players who probably don't do strikes cause they don't do much at all to prove he's the majority.

That might be true, but it's not relevant anyways. Whatever majority you want to argue doesn't make the point any less true. Y'all fixated so badly on whatever this majority debate is. It don't matter. We are at a stage in the game where Anet can't 'experiment' all that much with how they present content to players.

If it's not relevant and it doesn't matter then it shouldn't be coming out as an argument all the time. And when someone is wrong and gets presented with evidence and data to support that their claim is false, they should have the decency to accept it and not play the "Anet has the data" card.

And yet the Anet data card is the only card that actually matters Do you think Anet's going to read my post and think OMG Vayne's mad we'd better do something? Of course not. Anet isn't really interested in one person's opinion. They're interested in the overall trend and they'll look at the data and make a decision based on that. It's not a card.

People say things on the forums that are true or not true. Inaccurate or not inaccurate all the time. I'm 100% sure Anet doesn't look at that and say okay I'll change it based on that. They'll check their data and see what that data says. In this entire argument the only thing that actually matters is Anet's data. Not my opinion. Not my beliefs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Vilin.8056 said:This I apologise for falsely pointing onto you, but you should be aware the whole topic is about willing or not willing to do strike mission.

No, it's not about that; I would know because I've been following the thread since the first page.

I do think it's necessary that you be aware that this topic is related to the theme about how Anet offers content to players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Cylent.6078" said:Kudos to Vayne for starting this thread. And kudos, also, for saying nearly everything that's been on my mind since the achievements for this chapter were released.

What do we all have in common? We all want to play the game using the modes we enjoy most. Good intentions from ANet, but this is not the way. I want to see GW2 succeed, and I applaud every game mode that interests and challenges all players and prospective players. I like having an incentive to try new things. But making the Shadow In The Ice Mastery achievement reward dependent on mixing the modes (including strike missions) with no option of substituting an equivalent participation puts me, a loyal player, in a very negative space.

I'll be honest and a bit selfish here...I like the varied game modes. It gives L33t and/or competitive players a source of enjoyment and reduces the negativity in my map chat.

Please tell me, what category do I fit best? I log in every day (except a few maternity days off), do a few dailies (in different modes, mind you, but I prefer PvE). I have sunk some money into gems, and I love finishing collections & achievements, acquiring new skins, crafting, "fashion" wars, etc. I play the game to release a little steam, relax, and make some online friends. My screen time is limited (remember that maternity leave?), and I have a full time job. I play maybe 15-25 hours a week, across multiple accounts. I've never been good at jumping puzzles (however the light puzzles are much more fun for me). Maybe someone could offer a spiffy, stereotyped, category title for me? :)

My interests have changed along with my time availability, among other things, and are different from when I began playing GW in 2005. I want to achieve goals, but my hands are tied when it comes to Shadow in the Ice, which saddens me a great deal. I don't enjoy Strike and Raids. Maybe I'm good enough, maybe not. I don't have time or patience, and it's not my thing. I'd rather grind than suffer the RNG of trying to land in a fun group to Strike or Raid with. Almost all attempts of mine have been fruitless so far. It's either toxic, or takes more time than I can commit to, to be successful.

My husband and I have invested a great deal of time and money into this game, and we've also invested some hopes and dreams that when our little ones are old enough, this will be a source of entertainment for the whole family. We want to see it continue to succeed.

As Vayne has said, if ANet continues this strategy of leading players towards raiding, they're going to lose player interest rather than increase it. I liked an excellent suggestion I read somewhere between page 2 and 5 of this thread...maybe add more achievements to old maps as new content is released, to allow players to earn the reward w/o doing strike missions?

I have a lot less interest in the game when I am thinking ,"I'd like to, but..." Makes me want to channel my inner Sylvari...start a r.l. garden. My little ones are already mining precious ores (aka rocks) in our backyard. I have a kitchen and a sewing machine, and I'm pretty good a wielding a musical instrument, too. I suppose I have everything in r.l. that GW2 offers, except gliding, mounts, mobs of unfriendly creatures (perhaps bills, taxes, and traffic fit that description?), and large, shiny weapons. Don't take away my virtual rewards, ANet!

We have all grown up through out these years with since the first release of Guildwars2, and I too have given up many contents due to real life and families. I believe being able to appreciate life is truly a wonderful thing.

All I suggest is that you spent 20 minutes of your time with my community as we have been pugging with least half group of first timers with easy strategies and nearly 100% successful rate. I'm sure you will love the cheers of the aftermath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...