Top 3 reasons why raids only attracted a small audience

[Vilin.8056]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:I'd like to see that post where the developers stated that they stopped Raid development due to revenue because I can't find any.

Are you implying a lack of a post from Anet proves me wrong? because if that's true, EVERYONE is wrong; I've NEVER seen a post with ANY reason for why they stopped it. Maybe you just don't understand this thread ... this will be the THIRD time I'm reminding people we are speculating here. Let's hope that does the trick for the hard of reading folks.

No reason to get so worked up about it. If it was mere speculation there wouldn't be 10 pages, some try to make their speculation appear as the hard truth.

If you don't understand how revenue influences and drives business direction, then you don't have much to contribute to a discussion on it. There isn't any speculation about how that works. What I speculate about how raids have a small audience is based on some very common sense principles about business. You seem to have confused these common sense principles as speculative based on your statement.

Yet it is still your speculation over a content development you do not involve, in both financial or design.

Further more, you don't even know much about raid, that makes the whole discussion irrelevant.

[Obtena.7952]

@Vilin.8056 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:I'd like to see that post where the developers stated that they stopped Raid development due to revenue because I can't find any.

Are you implying a lack of a post from Anet proves me wrong? because if that's true, EVERYONE is wrong; I've NEVER seen a post with ANY reason for why they stopped it. Maybe you just don't understand this thread ... this will be the THIRD time I'm reminding people we are speculating here. Let's hope that does the trick for the hard of reading folks.

No reason to get so worked up about it. If it was mere speculation there wouldn't be 10 pages, some try to make their speculation appear as the hard truth.

If you don't understand how revenue influences and drives business direction, then you don't have much to contribute to a discussion on it. There isn't any speculation about how that works. What I speculate about how raids have a small audience is based on some very common sense principles about business. You seem to have confused these common sense principles as speculative based on your statement.

Yet it is still your speculation over a content development you do not involve, in both financial or design.

Clarify please ... what do you mean "you do not involve"? Are you saying I don't do raids? What leads you to that conclusion?

Further more, you don't even know much about raid, that makes the whole discussion irrelevant.

What makes you think that?

[maddoctor.2738]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:I'd like to see that post where the developers stated that they stopped Raid development due to revenue because I can't find any.

Are you implying a lack of a post from Anet proves me wrong? because if that's true, EVERYONE is wrong; I've NEVER seen a post with ANY reason for why they stopped it. Maybe you just don't understand this thread ... this will be the THIRD time I'm reminding people we are speculating here. Let's hope that does the trick for the hard of reading folks.

No reason to get so worked up about it. If it was mere speculation there wouldn't be 10 pages, some try to make their speculation appear as the hard truth.

If you don't understand how revenue influences and drives business direction, then you don't have much to contribute to a discussion on it. There isn't any speculation about how that works. What I speculate about how raids have a small audience is based on some very common sense principles about business. You seem to have confused these common sense principles as speculative based on your statement.

So it's speculation when someone else says it, but not when you do. We already went over your "common sense" and proved it to be factually wrong and that you have zero understanding of how businesses work. You have confused your speculation as common sense and based your statement on that, I can see that.

[Swagger.1459]

@"maddoctor.2738"

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/97028/a-message-from-andrew-gray

“Raids are a trickier beast. They're a unique experience and community that we want to find better ways to support, the biggest challenge in creating more is the small audience they attract.”

@"Obtena.7952" is correct. Anet can't justifying paying salaries and taking devs away from other projects for more raid development when there is only a small audience that will actually use said raid content. Anet was/is looking for alternate ways to support the raid groups without investing in raids specifically... Much like dungeons were canned in exchange for fractals. Fractals were less time and resource intensive to produce and maintain, which saves human power and money for other things. Anet is looking for the best return on investment always. Businesses are always looking for the best return on investment. That's how business goes. Look up "return on investment".

[Obtena.7952]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:I'd like to see that post where the developers stated that they stopped Raid development due to revenue because I can't find any.

Are you implying a lack of a post from Anet proves me wrong? because if that's true, EVERYONE is wrong; I've NEVER seen a post with ANY reason for why they stopped it. Maybe you just don't understand this thread ... this will be the THIRD time I'm reminding people we are speculating here. Let's hope that does the trick for the hard of reading folks.

No reason to get so worked up about it. If it was mere speculation there wouldn't be 10 pages, some try to make their speculation appear as the hard truth.

If you don't understand how revenue influences and drives business direction, then you don't have much to contribute to a discussion on it. There isn't any speculation about how that works. What I speculate about how raids have a small audience is based on some very common sense principles about business. You seem to have confused these common sense principles as speculative based on your statement.

So it's speculation when someone else says it, but not when you do. We already went over your "common sense" and proved it to be factually wrong and that you have zero understanding of how businesses work. You have confused your speculation as common sense and based your statement on that, I can see that.

There isn't anything speculative about a company using revenue as a decision-making factor to direct their resources to various activities they do; it's just common sense. I'm speculating that this common sense approach is why raids aren't seeing the development they once did. This isn't a hard thing to understand .. so if you can't bring yourself to understand this logical and reasonable hypothesis, it leads me to conclude you aren't qualified to discuss it with me.

[maddoctor.2738]

@Swagger.1459 said:@"maddoctor.2738"

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/97028/a-message-from-andrew-gray

“Raids are a trickier beast. They're a unique experience and community that we want to find better ways to support, the biggest challenge in creating more is the small audience they attract.”

There is nothing about revenue in that post. Try again

[maddoctor.2738]

@Obtena.7952 said:There isn't anything speculative about a company using revenue as a decision-making factor to direct their resources to various activities they do; it's just common sense. I'm speculating that this common sense approach is why raids aren't seeing the development they once did. This isn't a hard thing to understand .. so if you can't bring yourself to understand this logical and reasonable hypothesis, it leads me to conclude you aren't qualified to discuss it with me.

What's speculative is that the revenue is what played a role in why Raids aren't seeing the development they once had. It's not a very hard thing to understand, if you don't understand that this is pure speculation on your part then it leads me to conclude you aren't qualified to participate in this discussion and you are simply trolling.

[Swagger.1459]

@"maddoctor.2738" Andrew Gray, or any other dev, doesn't need to come out and say "we aren't going to spend dev time and money on raids because it's not worth it", when that community PR statement is a more appropriate message to convey to players. The only one who doesn't understand that business lingo is you.

[maddoctor.2738]

@Swagger.1459 said:@"maddoctor.2738" Andrew Gray, or any other dev, doesn't need to come out and say "we aren't going to spend dev time and money on raids because it's not worth it", when that community PR statement is a more appropriate message to convey to players. The only one who doesn't understand that business lingo is you.

First, that statement contradicts every other statement made in the pastSecond, that statement is a blanket statement referring to Raids as a whole, which makes it false by design, different Raids have completely different populations running themThird, it's not the first time. Remember Guild Missions? They essentially said they disbanded their Guild Team, was it because Guilds didn't bring money anymore?Remember dungeons and how they promoted Fractals instead? Was it because of revenue again? Or maybe it was because those responsible for making that content didn't work for the company anymore, so instead of working on top of what exists, they created something new.Notice how we haven't gotten a new Fractal for way longer than a new Raid. They recently hired the lead Fractal developer back, makes you wonder.Notice how we haven't gotten a new World Boss for nearly 2 years (Death-branded Shatterer was released nearly 2 years before Drakkar), were they also not worth spending money on and suddenly they are? Please.

That entire statement was PR talk, promoting the new toy and finding excuses to justify its existence and the abandonment of other content in its place. Again, not the first time that it happened.

[Swagger.1459]

@maddoctor.2738 Andrew Gray is saying that it's not worth the devs time and money to work on raids for a small audience period. Meaning PAID employees could be best used in other areas that generate a better RoI period. Not a new concept in business..

[Swagger.1459]

@"maddoctor.2738"

"Return on investment, or ROI, is the most common profitability ratio. There are several ways to determine ROI, but the most frequently used method is to divide net profit by total assets. So if your net profit is $100,000 and your total assets are $300,000, your ROI would be .33 or 33 percent.

Return on investment isn't necessarily the same as profit. ROI deals with the money you invest in the company and the return you realize on that money based on the net profit of the business. Profit, on the other hand, measures the performance of the business. Don't confuse ROI with the return on the owner's equity. This is an entirely different item as well. Only in sole proprietorships does equity equal the total investment or assets of the business."

"What Is Return on Investment (ROI)?Return on Investment (ROI) is a performance measure used to evaluate the efficiency of an investment or compare the efficiency of a number of different investments. ROI tries to directly measure the amount of return on a particular investment, relative to the investment’s cost."

"In business, the purpose of the return on investment (ROI) metric is to measure, per period, rates of return on money invested in an economic entity in order to decide whether or not to undertake an investment. It is also used as an indicator to compare different investments within a portfolio. The investment with the largest ROI is usually prioritized, even though the spread of ROI over the time period of an investment should also be taken into account."

In GW2 this means that the "small audience" content isn't a good "RoI" for Anet. Anet will search for a better "RoI" for both employees and players.

[maddoctor.2738]

@Swagger.1459 said:@"maddoctor.2738" Andrew Gray is saying that it's not worth the devs time and money to work on raids for a small audience period. Meaning PAID employees could be best used in other areas that generate a better RoI period. Not a new concept in business..

There is nothing like that in his post. In fact:"They're a unique experience and community that we want to find better ways to support"They want to find better ways to support Raids. Why would they do that if they were so harmful to the game?

In GW2 this means that the "small audience" content isn't a good "RoI" for Anet.

Is it the same for Guild Missions, Dungeons, Fractals, World Bosses and others that haven't been touched for years and either returned recently, or still waiting for more content?

[Obtena.7952]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:There isn't anything speculative about a company using revenue as a decision-making factor to direct their resources to various activities they do; it's just common sense. I'm speculating that this common sense approach is why raids aren't seeing the development they once did. This isn't a hard thing to understand .. so if you can't bring yourself to understand this logical and reasonable hypothesis, it leads me to conclude you aren't qualified to discuss it with me.

What's speculative is that the revenue is what played a role in why Raids aren't seeing the development they once had.

Yeah, I know ... I'm the one that speculated this in the first place and continue to repeat my position for you in hopes you start to understand it. I love the irony you are accusing me of not understanding my own statements or how I arrived at them. Unfortunately, it appears what I said still stands ... let me know when (or if) you catch up to understanding what I'm saying so we can continue.

[Obtena.7952]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:@maddoctor.2738 Andrew Gray is saying that it's not worth the devs time and money to work on raids for a small audience period. Meaning PAID employees could be best used in other areas that generate a better RoI period. Not a new concept in business..

There is nothing like that in his post. In fact:"They're a unique experience and community that we want to find better ways to support"They want to find better ways to support Raids. Why would they do that if they were so harmful to the game?

Who said they were harmful? NO one ... the argument here is about ROI, not harm to the game. Those things aren't related, so why would you bring that into the discussion?

In GW2 this means that the "small audience" content isn't a good "RoI" for Anet.

Is it the same for Guild Missions, Dungeons, Fractals, World Bosses and others that haven't been touched for years and either returned recently, or still waiting for more content?

It very well could be ... the same speculation about ROI could apply to these game elements just as easily as it does for raids. Do you understand what speculating is? Did you even READ what ROI is that Swagger provided to you?

[Swagger.1459]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:@maddoctor.2738 Andrew Gray is saying that it's not worth the devs time and money to work on raids for a small audience period. Meaning PAID employees could be best used in other areas that generate a better RoI period. Not a new concept in business..

There is nothing like that in his post. In fact:"They're a unique experience and community that we want to find better ways to support"They want to find better ways to support Raids. Why would they do that if they were so harmful to the game?

In GW2 this means that the "small audience" content isn't a good "RoI" for Anet.

Is it the same for Guild Missions, Dungeons, Fractals, World Bosses and others that haven't been touched for years and either returned recently, or still waiting for more content?

Follow along here...

The devs do not want to make more raids because they currently only attract a small audience at the end of the day.

The devs tried introducing strike missions as stepping stones to hopefully encourage more player to try raid content and build up the population for raids. This was their first attempt at finding a way to “support” the raid community without making more actual raids that currently only draw a “small audience”.

I’m sure the devs will attempt other means to encourage more people to try raids and “support” that community by adding more bodies. But again, without creating more actual raids that currently only draw a “small audience”.

Instead of saying “we are completely abandoning any and all efforts”, they are trying something to support the raid community without making actual raids that currently only appeal to a “small audience”.

I made my thread with the 3 main points as to why raids only attracted a small audience. Maybe the devs will invest in those areas at some point to help support the raid community.

[Vilin.8056]

@Swagger.1459 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:@maddoctor.2738 Andrew Gray is saying that it's not worth the devs time and money to work on raids for a small audience period. Meaning PAID employees could be best used in other areas that generate a better RoI period. Not a new concept in business..

There is nothing like that in his post. In fact:"They're a unique experience and community that we want to find better ways to support"They want to find better ways to support Raids. Why would they do that if they were so harmful to the game?

In GW2 this means that the "small audience" content isn't a good "RoI" for Anet.

Is it the same for Guild Missions, Dungeons, Fractals, World Bosses and others that haven't been touched for years and either returned recently, or still waiting for more content?

Follow along here...

The devs do not want to make more raids because they currently only attract a small audience at the end of the day.

The devs tried introducing strike missions as stepping stones to hopefully encourage more player to try raid content and build up the population for raids. This was their first attempt at finding a way to “support” the raid community without making more actual raids that currently only draw a “small audience”.

I’m sure the devs will attempt other means to encourage more people to try raids and “support” that community by adding more bodies. But again, without creating more actual raids that currently only draw a “small audience”.

Instead of saying “we are completely abandoning any and all efforts”, they are trying something to support the raid community without making actual raids that currently only appeal to a “small audience”.

I made my thread with the 3 main points as to why raids only attracted a small audience. Maybe the devs will invest in those areas at some point to help support the raid community.

Again, which also came out from nothing but biased personal interpretation of a developer comment with no actual evident to prove.

Some people just confuse personal speculations as facts.

[maddoctor.2738]

@Obtena.7952 said:Yeah, I know ... I'm the one that speculated this in the first place and continue to repeat my position for you in hopes you start to understand it.

If you don't understand how revenue influences and drives business direction, then you don't have much to contribute to a discussion on it. There isn't any speculation about how that works.

So which is it? Do you speculate that revenue influenced that decision or not?

[maddoctor.2738]

@"Swagger.1459" said:The devs do not want to make more raids because they currently only attract a small audience at the end of the day.

Key word: currently. How did we go from "population is fine" to "population is small", none of your 3 points address this.

I made my thread with the 3 main points as to why raids only attracted a small audience.

They didn't attract a small audience, they ended up with a small audience, the audience they "attracted" was fine. Until mistakes were made that led to the population drop. Mistakes that have very little to do with any of your points. I hope you can understand the difference.

[Vilin.8056]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:@maddoctor.2738 Andrew Gray is saying that it's not worth the devs time and money to work on raids for a small audience period. Meaning PAID employees could be best used in other areas that generate a better RoI period. Not a new concept in business..

There is nothing like that in his post. In fact:"They're a unique experience and community that we want to find better ways to support"They want to find better ways to support Raids. Why would they do that if they were so harmful to the game?

Who said they were harmful? NO one ... the argument here is about ROI, not harm to the game. Those things aren't related, so why would you bring that into the discussion?

In GW2 this means that the "small audience" content isn't a good "RoI" for Anet.

Is it the same for Guild Missions, Dungeons, Fractals, World Bosses and others that haven't been touched for years and either returned recently, or still waiting for more content?

It very well could be ... the same speculation about ROI could apply to these game elements just as easily as it does for raids. Do you understand what speculating is? Did you even READ what ROI is that Swagger provided to you?

Again, you're judging a game development direction with no actual prove but a loosely based principle that has no direct connection with Raid development, you are the one speculating.In your logic, every single game of this world needs to cut 50% of their own contents.I'm not sure how much do you know about game design in general.

Talk about confusion.

[Swagger.1459]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@"Swagger.1459" said:The devs do not want to make more raids because they currently only attract a small audience at the end of the day.

Key word: currently. How did we go from "population is fine" to "population is small", none of your 3 points address this.

I made my thread with the 3 main points as to why raids only attracted a small audience.

They didn't attract a small audience, they ended up with a small audience, the audience they "attracted" was fine. Until mistakes were made that led to the population drop. Mistakes that have very little to do with any of your points. I hope you can understand the difference.

I already stated the “why” in my op. Don’t need to cover it again. However, I’m glad we are on the same “RoI” page now!

[Obtena.7952]

@Vilin.8056 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:@maddoctor.2738 Andrew Gray is saying that it's not worth the devs time and money to work on raids for a small audience period. Meaning PAID employees could be best used in other areas that generate a better RoI period. Not a new concept in business..

There is nothing like that in his post. In fact:"They're a unique experience and community that we want to find better ways to support"They want to find better ways to support Raids. Why would they do that if they were so harmful to the game?

Who said they were harmful? NO one ... the argument here is about ROI, not harm to the game. Those things aren't related, so why would you bring that into the discussion?

In GW2 this means that the "small audience" content isn't a good "RoI" for Anet.

Is it the same for Guild Missions, Dungeons, Fractals, World Bosses and others that haven't been touched for years and either returned recently, or still waiting for more content?

It very well could be ... the same speculation about ROI could apply to these game elements just as easily as it does for raids. Do you understand what speculating is? Did you even READ what ROI is that Swagger provided to you?

Again, you're judging a game development direction with no actual prove

Yeah .. it's called speculation ... it's what the whole thread is about. Advice: if you're going to drop in 11 pages later, you have 10 pages to catch up on.

[Obtena.7952]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:Yeah, I know ... I'm the one that speculated this in the first place and continue to repeat my position for you in hopes you start to understand it.

If you don't understand how revenue influences and drives business direction, then you don't have much to contribute to a discussion on it. There isn't any speculation about how that works.

So which is it? Do you speculate that revenue influenced that decision or not?

I don't get what you're after here. I already clarified this for you just a few posts ago. Here, let me quote myself, just for you.

@Obtena.7952 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:I'd like to see that post where the developers stated that they stopped Raid development due to revenue because I can't find any.

Are you implying a lack of a post from Anet proves me wrong? because if that's true, EVERYONE is wrong; I've NEVER seen a post with ANY reason for why they stopped it. Maybe you just don't understand this thread ... this will be the THIRD time I'm reminding people we are speculating here. Let's hope that does the trick for the hard of reading folks.

No reason to get so worked up about it. If it was mere speculation there wouldn't be 10 pages, some try to make their speculation appear as the hard truth.

If you don't understand how revenue influences and drives business direction, then you don't have much to contribute to a discussion on it. There isn't any speculation about how that works. What I speculate about how raids have a small audience is based on some very common sense principles about business. You seem to have confused these common sense principles as speculative based on your statement.

So it's speculation when someone else says it, but not when you do. We already went over your "common sense" and proved it to be factually wrong and that you have zero understanding of how businesses work. You have confused your speculation as common sense and based your statement on that, I can see that.

There isn't anything speculative about a company using revenue as a decision-making factor to direct their resources to various activities they do; it's just common sense. I'm speculating that this common sense approach is why raids aren't seeing the development they once did. This isn't a hard thing to understand .. so if you can't bring yourself to understand this logical and reasonable hypothesis, it leads me to conclude you aren't qualified to discuss it with me.

What part don't you get?

[Swagger.1459]

@Vilin.8056 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:@maddoctor.2738 Andrew Gray is saying that it's not worth the devs time and money to work on raids for a small audience period. Meaning PAID employees could be best used in other areas that generate a better RoI period. Not a new concept in business..

There is nothing like that in his post. In fact:"They're a unique experience and community that we want to find better ways to support"They want to find better ways to support Raids. Why would they do that if they were so harmful to the game?

In GW2 this means that the "small audience" content isn't a good "RoI" for Anet.

Is it the same for Guild Missions, Dungeons, Fractals, World Bosses and others that haven't been touched for years and either returned recently, or still waiting for more content?

Follow along here...

The devs do not want to make more raids because they currently only attract a small audience at the end of the day.

The devs tried introducing strike missions as stepping stones to hopefully encourage more player to try raid content and build up the population for raids. This was their first attempt at finding a way to “support” the raid community without making more actual raids that currently only draw a “small audience”.

I’m sure the devs will attempt other means to encourage more people to try raids and “support” that community by adding more bodies. But again, without creating more actual raids that currently only draw a “small audience”.

Instead of saying “we are completely abandoning any and all efforts”, they are trying something to support the raid community without making actual raids that currently only appeal to a “small audience”.

I made my thread with the 3 main points as to why raids only attracted a small audience. Maybe the devs will invest in those areas at some point to help support the raid community.

Again, which also came out from nothing but biased personal interpretation of a developer comment with no actual evident to prove.

Some people just confuse personal speculations as facts.

My words are the facts given by Andrew.

[maddoctor.2738]

@Swagger.1459 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:The devs do not want to make more raids because they currently only attract a small audience at the end of the day.

Key word: currently. How did we go from "population is fine" to "population is small", none of your 3 points address this.

I made my thread with the 3 main points as to why raids only attracted a small audience.

They didn't attract a small audience, they ended up with a small audience, the audience they "attracted" was fine. Until mistakes were made that led to the population drop. Mistakes that have very little to do with any of your points. I hope you can understand the difference.

I already stated the “why” in my op. Don’t need to cover it again. However, I’m glad we are on the same “RoI” page now!

There is nothing about it in your OP.Let's see step by step.

Was the Raid audience "small" at least until the release of Path of Fire? According to the developers it was both acceptable AND they promised more releases. So the answer to that is probably a no, unless they were lying or something.Did Raids back then have difficulty modes that were suddenly removed from the game to lead to the current small audience? No, I don't recall Raids having difficulty tiers that were suddenly removed.

So we have Raids with a fine audience without having any difficulty tiers, that then become a small audience for a variety of reasons and you claim that reason is difficulty tiers. See the fault in your OP? Your OP would make sense if difficulty tiers existed and then they were removed OR if Raids never had a proper audience. Both of these are false. So the argument of "raids have a small audience due to not having difficulty tiers" is flawed, and factually wrong.

edit: your "profession design" argument has the exact same flaws

[Swagger.1459]

@Vilin.8056 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:@maddoctor.2738 Andrew Gray is saying that it's not worth the devs time and money to work on raids for a small audience period. Meaning PAID employees could be best used in other areas that generate a better RoI period. Not a new concept in business..

There is nothing like that in his post. In fact:"They're a unique experience and community that we want to find better ways to support"They want to find better ways to support Raids. Why would they do that if they were so harmful to the game?

In GW2 this means that the "small audience" content isn't a good "RoI" for Anet.

Is it the same for Guild Missions, Dungeons, Fractals, World Bosses and others that haven't been touched for years and either returned recently, or still waiting for more content?

Follow along here...

The devs do not want to make more raids because they currently only attract a small audience at the end of the day.

The devs tried introducing strike missions as stepping stones to hopefully encourage more player to try raid content and build up the population for raids. This was their first attempt at finding a way to “support” the raid community without making more actual raids that currently only draw a “small audience”.

I’m sure the devs will attempt other means to encourage more people to try raids and “support” that community by adding more bodies. But again, without creating more actual raids that currently only draw a “small audience”.

Instead of saying “we are completely abandoning any and all efforts”, they are trying something to support the raid community without making actual raids that currently only appeal to a “small audience”.

I made my thread with the 3 main points as to why raids only attracted a small audience. Maybe the devs will invest in those areas at some point to help support the raid community.

Again, which also came out from nothing but biased personal interpretation of a developer comment with no actual evident to prove.

Some people just confuse personal speculations as facts.

I’ll be extra helpful!

@Fire Attunement.9835 said:Hey everybody, my name is Andrew Gray. I took over as Content Design Lead a few months back and I want to talk a bit about last year, this year, and what's on the horizon for Guild Wars 2.

First, 2019 was hard. I've been with ArenaNet since 2004 and I can say without question that 2019 was the studio's most challenging. Many of the people who left in 2019 were not involved in the day-to-day development of Guild Wars 2, that much is true--but they were our friends, colleagues, and in some cases literally family. All the teams were affected by saying goodbye to so many colleagues. I'm proud of what we were able to ship under the circumstances, but we also understand the legacy we are trying to carry forward with Guild Wars 2; rather than slip into a status quo, we are all determined to create an even better game moving forward.

We've got our footing and we have exciting plans for the future of GW2. I can't talk about what I'm most excited for yet, but I can tell you 2020 is laying the groundwork for an exciting future. Here are some of the highlights:

Living World

• Between episodes two and three, we already mentioned we'll be releasing a special new type of content called Visions of the Past; we'll have more details on that at PAX East.
• I can't go into a ton of details on episodes three and four because, you know, spoilers and all, but I can tell you the map is meta-focused with a push-and-pull feel similar to WvW in a PvE setting. We want maps this season to bring something to them that makes them a permanent part of your play experience. That's why the culmination of Bjora Marches is a world boss and we're striving for high replayability for the episodes three and four map. We want it to be a unique, fun, and rewarding experience that will be part of your daily/weekly play cycle.
• After episode four, again I'm going to be somewhat vague here, but we want to revisit some of the types of content we pioneered in the past. We learned a lot with Living World Season One and one thing it did very well was to bring the community into the story, and make their actions drive the plot forward. The Nightmare Tower, the election between Evon Gnashblade and Ellen Kiel – these things are memorable experiences because the community's combined efforts had an impact on the world. As you may have noticed, we've been testing tech with things like the boss rush event, that we hope to leverage later on in The Icebrood Saga to create a unique, community experience. But, learning lessons from Season 1, the bulk of this content will be built in a way that it is still playable after the Icebrood Saga comes to a close.
• Generally, as a team, we are placing a greater emphasis on repeatable content (open world events, world bosses, WvW, and yes, even Fractals (hint hint)). We want to make the types of content that have a lasting, positive impact on the game, so expect that design approach to focus on that more going forward.

On the topic of Fractals…

• Reports of their death have been greatly exaggerated, though I apologize that our silence on the topic raised that concern.
• I am personally committed to Fractals and see them as an area that deserves more focus and attention going forward. I'm happy to announce that Cameron Rich, who worked on Fractals during Season Three, will be taking the reins on a new Fractal as he rolls off his current duties. This Fractal will feature a challenge mode. Beyond that, I'm working with the Systems Design team on more plans to keep Fractals fresh and exciting. I'm excited and when everything is ready to share, we'll have more details.

Raids

• Raids are a trickier beast. They're a unique experience and community that we want to find better ways to support, the biggest challenge in creating more is the small audience they attract. We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there isn't anything to help players work their way up.
• Our intention was for Strike Missions to be that intermediary step into 10-person content. As we've mentioned before and you've likely noticed, strike missions are getting harder. Once a full suite of strike missions is complete there should be a graceful ramp up to the existing raid content rather than the imposing leap that previously existed, and our hope is once that ramp is in place, the number of players participating in raids will go up. In addition to that, we're striving to make improvements to Strike Missions themselves to make grouping easier, and to improve the rewards. We hope this will help introduce more people to 10-person content, which will in turn increase the number of people interested in Raids.
• Regardless of if that succeeds or not, we understand the importance of balancing our efforts between accessible content with broad appeal, and content that appeals to the more hard core audience, and recognize that we need to do a better job of supporting the latter.

I'm excited for what's coming next. There's going to be more news coming out throughout this year that will make it pretty kitten clear why, but in the meantime, we're incredibly grateful for all your constructive feedback and continued support of the game.