Rex.3602

Ah didn't see it. First time being on the forums. Y it probably does. But it also feels bad when I just learned my rotation, did 20k DPS on a boss but when I asked if someone could tell me my DPS I was basically told to stop being an ***hole and download arcdps. At this point I guess I'll have to download Gw2 onto my laptop which is not something I wanted :/ Wow that sounds terrible. I don't think that kind of response was warranted. It's indeed an interesting feature that you are requesting, never thought it may be needed. Haha yeah. This topic is definitely different, and presents an interesting situation and dilemma.

No idea exactly why they disallowed it, but I'm pretty sure they would have had a good reason other than supposedly trying to increase their revenue. It would actually take extra effort to go out and disallow plugins, and probably is not worth it financially unless there is some other reason to also disallow it. They are not some evil company that is out to make money in every possible way that they can, despite what the haters think. They are no better or worse than any other business. We don't say they are evil, but like @Obtena.7952 like to repeat it (:p <3), they are still a business. If the monetization was secondary they wouldn't implement it this way. For example they could have made real build templates without cutting it in 2 (the account version are templates but only 24 max), it doesn't take space cause it is just text file i.e. (and with chatcodes players can completely bypass it, so anet ones slots are meaningless). They could also made the unlocks account-wise (even with a higher price), so it could be reroll friendly like the rest of the game... (that's just few examples) And we don't know who tells them to do it that way (it could be a demand from ncsoft)...Yes I agree they are a business and will act as such. Which is why it doesn't make much financial sense to spend development time in disallowing a plugin, unless it affects gameplay detrimentally or causes some other issue that the devs may think worthwhile addressing. Well template implementation prove you wrong on this (and it is easy for them because arcdps developper is in contact with anet to be sure it is always tos compliant). It hasn't proven anything wrong, because there are many reasons other than simply making money to disallow a plugin. I don't know anything about this arcdps developer and their relation with anet. I don't think the arcdps developer is perfect though, and there may be accidental mistakes made by the plugin developer or changes in opinion from anet. Of course it's okay with a casual approach, which is what I am getting at. Just because it's not useful for you doesn't mean it's not useful. I find it very useful, especially since I don't have to use a plugin to have this feature now. Again, you are complaining about how it's currently implemented, which is not what the topic of this thread is about. I agree, let's not talk about how to improve templates because it's not the purpose of the original post. We also don't say it's not usefull for some people , we said it's ok/nice for those who don't really need a template system (like adding some inventory slots). Anet just seems to miss the target audience for this feature.Who said I don't really need a template system? Your so called target audience seems to be dictated by you and not the actual devs at anet. That sounds like a problem that you have had with the implementation, which is a separate issue.It's not a separate issue. It's very much a core of the problem. A badly implemented system that costs us an already well-working solution (even if that solution was a third-party implementation, not an ingame system) is a straight out loss - something worse than not having that system implemented at all. And having that loss be heavily overmonetized is just adding insult to the injury. Personally I haven't encountered any problems yet with the way the templates currently work.Then you probably didn't have a need for a template system in the first place. It's not that this system has problems (it does have them, but let's leave it for another discussion). It's that it is way too limited to be of serious use for someone that truly needs it. Yes, even fully unlocked.And those limitations are a direct consequence of this system being designed primarily for monetization, not for QoL. If the devs can make a functional dps meter with basic features I would be satisfied. I wouldn't need any advanced or special features.Remember, that them implementing an ingame dps meter would mean an end to ArcDPS development. As such, implementing a solution that would offer us less than Arc would be a loss. Especially if we'd need to pay for it.You might not need anything more than that basic functionality, but for many players that are actively using Arc, that basic functionality is one of its least important functions. At this point i do not believe they could implement something that would even equal Arc, and i do not have faith in that system not getting monetized. As such, i'd rather they left things as they are. I would rather not use any plugins, and I don't use them at the moment since I don't raid. I don't see any reason why they couldn't allow the plugin to also be used instead if some people find it better. I am using templates for all of my characters. I'm not saying the system couldn't be improved, but the way it is right now I have found it to be perfectly functional for all of my needs. As @Astralporing.1957 said, the "template" system (loadout is the right word) is ok for people that barely need it like if you don't use many builds (1 or 2 per character), don't have many characters, don't use legendary gears outside loadouts (i.e. not swapping with inventory or others char), don't really use revenant (build loadout still bugged as hell after one year)...That's a bit restrictive imo.And if you didn't know/use Arc templates before Anet release the current version, i totally understand that you like it (that's nice for you :) ). But for those who did, anet version is litteraly WORSE than nothing (i.e. leg and revenant issues).Thing is it was quite obvious at release that the loadout system was crippled on purpose to promote monetization (triple layers of it) first and quality of life after (Anet usually don't do that but here it is). I don't know who exactly these raiders consider to be "casual" or don't need the template system. I use the template system a lot when switching builds between PvE and WvW (for example between CC and healing), so it's definitely useful for me and the purposes I require. Well maybe not casual, but how many builds (traits +gears) do you use with yours characters ?I use different gear, weapons and traits for builds in all 5 of my level 80 characters. And it is not the case here, Anet was totally fine with arctemplates for years (as i said the dev are in contact with anet) before releasing their own poor version (imo) and demand deltaconnected to stop it. So why couldn't Anet change their policy or stance at any point in time on plugins? Past behaviour is not necessarily indicative of future behaviour. And i could tell you exactly the same :) Why would they ask arc templates to be disabled otherwise? I just gave you a reason in the previous sentence in the post that you quoted. Not my problem if you for some reason refuse to accept it as a possibility.

That sounds like a problem that you have had with the implementation, which is a separate issue.It's not a separate issue. It's very much a core of the problem. A badly implemented system that costs us an already well-working solution (even if that solution was a third-party implementation, not an ingame system) is a straight out loss - something worse than not having that system implemented at all. And having that loss be heavily overmonetized is just adding insult to the injury. Personally I haven't encountered any problems yet with the way the templates currently work.Then you probably didn't have a need for a template system in the first place. It's not that this system has problems (it does have them, but let's leave it for another discussion). It's that it is way too limited to be of serious use for someone that truly needs it. Yes, even fully unlocked.And those limitations are a direct consequence of this system being designed primarily for monetization, not for QoL. If the devs can make a functional dps meter with basic features I would be satisfied. I wouldn't need any advanced or special features.Remember, that them implementing an ingame dps meter would mean an end to ArcDPS development. As such, implementing a solution that would offer us less than Arc would be a loss. Especially if we'd need to pay for it.You might not need anything more than that basic functionality, but for many players that are actively using Arc, that basic functionality is one of its least important functions. At this point i do not believe they could implement something that would even equal Arc, and i do not have faith in that system not getting monetized. As such, i'd rather they left things as they are. I would rather not use any plugins, and I don't use them at the moment since I don't raid. I don't see any reason why they couldn't allow the plugin to also be used instead if some people find it better. I am using templates for all of my characters. I'm not saying the system couldn't be improved, but the way it is right now I have found it to be perfectly functional for all of my needs. As @Astralporing.1957 said, the "template" system (loadout is the right word) is ok for people that barely need it like if you don't use many builds (1 or 2 per character), don't have many characters, don't use legendary gears outside loadouts (i.e. not swapping with inventory or others char), don't really use revenant (build loadout still bugged as hell after one year)...That's a bit restrictive imo.And if you didn't know/use Arc templates before Anet release the current version, i totally understand that you like it (that's nice for you :) ). But for those who did, anet version is litteraly WORSE than nothing (i.e. leg and revenant issues).Thing is it was quite obvious at release that the loadout system was crippled on purpose to promote monetization (triple layers of it) first and quality of life after (Anet usually don't do that but here it is).I don't know who exactly these raiders consider to be "casual" or don't need the template system. I use the template system a lot when switching builds between PvE and WvW (for example between CC and healing), so it's definitely useful for me and the purposes I require. Nobody said that the current implementation was better than the plugin ;) . I highly doubt that it was crippled on purpose for monetization because it would require extra effort to actually do so. I have seen in other games, for instance, where plugins were disabled because they contained aspects that the devs considered detrimental to gameplay. It would probably help a little if you could think outside the box, instead of coming to the conclusion that they must only be out for money.

No idea exactly why they disallowed it, but I'm pretty sure they would have had a good reason other than supposedly trying to increase their revenue. It would actually take extra effort to go out and disallow plugins, and probably is not worth it financially unless there is some other reason to also disallow it. They are not some evil company that is out to make money in every possible way that they can, despite what the haters think. They are no better or worse than any other business. If they wanted to disallow a dps meter, they could easily have done that for the plugin by now. I find it extremely unlikely that they would go out and do it once it is monetized, since it would require extra effort and be blatantly hurting their reputation. Of course it's okay with a casual approach, which is what I am getting at. Just because it's not useful for you doesn't mean it's not useful. I find it very useful, especially since I don't have to use a plugin to have this feature now. Again, you are complaining about how it's currently implemented, which is not what the topic of this thread is about. I agree, let's not talk about how to improve templates because it's not the purpose of the original post.

That sounds like a problem that you have had with the implementation, which is a separate issue.It's not a separate issue. It's very much a core of the problem. A badly implemented system that costs us an already well-working solution (even if that solution was a third-party implementation, not an ingame system) is a straight out loss - something worse than not having that system implemented at all. And having that loss be heavily overmonetized is just adding insult to the injury. Personally I haven't encountered any problems yet with the way the templates currently work.Then you probably didn't have a need for a template system in the first place. It's not that this system has problems (it does have them, but let's leave it for another discussion). It's that it is way too limited to be of serious use for someone that truly needs it. Yes, even fully unlocked.And those limitations are a direct consequence of this system being designed primarily for monetization, not for QoL. If the devs can make a functional dps meter with basic features I would be satisfied. I wouldn't need any advanced or special features.Remember, that them implementing an ingame dps meter would mean an end to ArcDPS development. As such, implementing a solution that would offer us less than Arc would be a loss. Especially if we'd need to pay for it.You might not need anything more than that basic functionality, but for many players that are actively using Arc, that basic functionality is one of its least important functions. At this point i do not believe they could implement something that would even equal Arc, and i do not have faith in that system not getting monetized. As such, i'd rather they left things as they are.I would rather not use any plugins, and I don't use them at the moment since I don't raid. I don't see any reason why they couldn't allow the plugin to also be used instead if some people find it better. I am using templates for all of my characters. I'm not saying the system couldn't be improved, but the way it is right now I have found it to be perfectly functional for all of my needs.

That sounds like a problem that you have had with the implementation, which is a separate issue. Personally I haven't encountered any problems yet with the way the templates currently work. If the devs can make a functional dps meter with basic features I would be satisfied. I wouldn't need any advanced or special features.

yea, wow and wildstar totally proves that point. and swtor. and dcuo. and EVE. even STO arent afraid to swing the nerfhammer.steam players in swtor actually get their first companion at lvl 1 now. The so called casual players that purchase things for a few days and then disappear once their solo fix has been satisfied doesn't seem to be helping the MMO market either, so there's not much point in trying to satisfy them other than a quick short-term profit that will mean little in the long run. it is not only to fill the pockets of the devs, but also the GAME. when an mmo starts feeling empty, the game will go into a death spiralhaving a good levelling experience is like having a good kindergarden. it will repopulate the game with well motivated players.and NOT having one will do the opposite. The solo casual players that only play for the story and then leave barely make any MMO seem more populated, especially when there are solo instances that must be completed. I'm sure the players that get involved in the open world through events such as meta events in HoT have a much greater impact on the perceived player population in the game. yep, the key word is "perceived". cramming 40 solo drivers into one bus would have the same effect. so of course group play looks more populated.but the shorter solo missions are still the bread and butter of mmos, if they fail, then the whole game suffers I'm also sure that people who group up (or pseudo-group) to do harder content make up a big (probably larger) proportion of the game population than the purely solo players that play for only the story. Unless you have the evidence to prove otherwise of course. look at the number of solo missions . core was build after years of planning and market research. i doubt they would had went through all that trouble,unless they had VERY good reasons for it. and if core hadnt performed, this game would had collapsed many years ago.I highly doubt core was at all successful because of the solo missions in the story. The story was very poor even by MMO standards. I know for certain that me and everyone else that I know didn't stick around in the game because of the core game story. nope, hot was garbage. pof was a little better, but certainly not a place i would like to stick around. if there was some kind of progression in corei would return to it, but there isnt. For me I found the opposite: pof was garbage, and hot was a bit better. I have absolutely zero reason to return to pof now that I have completed the story, unlocked mounts and completed masteries. The maps in PoF are desolate and boring, and same goes for the events in it.

I would like this or the skyscale to be available for use in WvW. =)

Like others have said, the events in maps seem to be fixed at a point in time. I like to think that the story in the meta event occurs slightly before the end of the main story in the map occurs, in order to weaken Kralk and make him more vulnerable.

Just going to add that I personally would rather see a feature that was heavily monetized added to the game, rather than not see any such feature added to the game at all. Of course, it would be better if it was not monetized though. The devs got to eat too.

I think what we can all agree on is that both the HoT and PoF expansions had good features that the other did not. I would like to see more frequent expansions in the future, rather than living world content, since I generally find the quality of them to be superior to living world, and they seem to attract more purchases with money than giving out rushed free content does. This in turn leads to a more financially sound and populated game in the long run (without causing an uproar from the crowd that wants everything for free).

Same. Now that I have unlocked them it doesn't really make much of a difference to the fun that I have in game. I highly doubt it will change now because many people have unlocked it as it is. The most that one can hope for is feedback for the future.

According to NCSoft, yes. You have a source for that? That specifically stated players quitting the game was the reason for reduced revenue? True, the game gained millions of accounts and people weren't buying the game. But is that a fault of the expansion?Is the expansion at fault if one of those million free accounts quit the game after beating the tutorial?Is the expansion at fault if one of those million free accounts quit the game before reaching level 50?I don't dispute that people weren't converting, I'm disputing that HOT was to blame for that. Did they? In which quarterly report did they mention that because I can't find any mention of HOT failing to meet player expectations, but rather the game (as a whole) being unable to convert free players into paid players, which, as I stated above I don't believe it's because of HOT. The core game is to blame for lack of conversions, not the expansion. The game went free to play, meaning players no longer had to buy it to try it, which is also why post HOT revenue was lower than pre HOT revenue Are you forgetting that HOT was selling when POF launched? When they bundled HOT for free with purchase of POF, their revenue tanked to its lowest point ever. Was that just a coincidence? Or it was a fact that during the POF era, HOT was still selling, that 2 year old "failure" still contributing to the game in a meaningful way, considering the great revenue drop when they made it free. As for the increase in quarterly sales, was it because POF was more casual than HOT and better received by the players, or maybe it was because Mount skins sell better than Glider skins? Because that's the question of the thread. Not which expansion had better revenue, but why. There are 232 mount skins in the game and 90 glider skins, just by the seer number difference we can see a serious driving force for revenue. Furthermore, for the first time in its history, Guild Wars 2 added "gambling" for those mount skins, and we all know how that went, and even though tweaked, mount licenses still exist. 2k gem "deluxe" mount skins were made available, and outfit/weapon bundles also priced at 2k were introduced to the game disallowing players the ability to pick individual items. As with free players converting into paid players, I don't dispute that POF sold better than HOT, the revenue reports are readily available. However, I dispute the idea that it was because POF was more casual friendly than HOT and "better received" by the players. We are talking about the expansion that had empty meta events and maps shortly after release, I'm not sure how such a failure can be called "better received". Rather, the success of POF was made possible due to monetization changes, much much heavier focus on the gem store and mounts being much more lucrative than gliders. Once you lose people, you're only able to get a portion of them back, so regardless of the reason why people quit, there's no debating that it affected PoF. Yes but the follow up question is: did the population drop of HOT affected POF sales more, or less than the population drop caused by the Core game? Which drop affected the game more, the drop due to it being too casual (core) or the drop due to it being too hardcore (HOT)I think an important consideration in deciding whether the HoT or PoF expansion was more of a success is the decline of the game in 2019. From all the information I have been able to gather, 2019 seemed like an especially poor year for GW2 both in financial and player population terms. Yes it's true that all MMOs will wane over time as some players will lose interest, but that year was exceptionally bad. It was also suspiciously soon after the PoF expansion released. The ideal expansion in my mind would be somewhere in between the HoT and PoF expansions. The events in the HoT maps were more fun, challenging and rewarding than the ones in the PoF maps. But the PoF expansion had a better story imo.

yea, wow and wildstar totally proves that point. and swtor. and dcuo. and EVE. even STO arent afraid to swing the nerfhammer.steam players in swtor actually get their first companion at lvl 1 now. The so called casual players that purchase things for a few days and then disappear once their solo fix has been satisfied doesn't seem to be helping the MMO market either, so there's not much point in trying to satisfy them other than a quick short-term profit that will mean little in the long run. it is not only to fill the pockets of the devs, but also the GAME. when an mmo starts feeling empty, the game will go into a death spiralhaving a good levelling experience is like having a good kindergarden. it will repopulate the game with well motivated players.and NOT having one will do the opposite. The solo casual players that only play for the story and then leave barely make any MMO seem more populated, especially when there are solo instances that must be completed. I'm sure the players that get involved in the open world through events such as meta events in HoT have a much greater impact on the perceived player population in the game. yep, the key word is "perceived". cramming 40 solo drivers into one bus would have the same effect. so of course group play looks more populated.but the shorter solo missions are still the bread and butter of mmos, if they fail, then the whole game suffersI'm also sure that people who group up (or pseudo-group) to do harder content make up a big (probably larger) proportion of the game population than the purely solo players that play for only the story. Unless you have the evidence to prove otherwise of course.

yea, wow and wildstar totally proves that point. and swtor. and dcuo. and EVE. even STO arent afraid to swing the nerfhammer.steam players in swtor actually get their first companion at lvl 1 now. The so called casual players that purchase things for a few days and then disappear once their solo fix has been satisfied doesn't seem to be helping the MMO market either, so there's not much point in trying to satisfy them other than a quick short-term profit that will mean little in the long run. it is not only to fill the pockets of the devs, but also the GAME. when an mmo starts feeling empty, the game will go into a death spiralhaving a good levelling experience is like having a good kindergarden. it will repopulate the game with well motivated players.and NOT having one will do the opposite. The solo casual players that only play for the story and then leave barely make any MMO seem more populated, especially when there are solo instances that must be completed. I'm sure the players that get involved in the open world through events such as meta events in HoT have a much greater impact on the perceived player population in the game.

Probably easier to just turn the entire game into an interactive film. :p

yea, wow and wildstar totally proves that point. and swtor. and dcuo. and EVE. even STO arent afraid to swing the nerfhammer.steam players in swtor actually get their first companion at lvl 1 now. The so called casual players that purchase things for a few days and then disappear once their solo fix has been satisfied doesn't seem to be helping the MMO market either, so there's not much point in trying to satisfy them other than a quick short-term profit that will mean little in the long run.

Honestly it seems like that some players want to auto-attack everything to death with 1 skill so that they can finish the story in 6 hours of gameplay and not touch the game again for a couple of months. IMO catering to these types of players is not healthy for longer-term player population and success.

This has been my experience too. I've pretty much given up on going to the map unless there's a group in LFG for Drizzlewood, because 9 times out of 10 I will be placed into a map that doesn't even try to capture Vloxen Mine or Petraj Overlook.

I like the hearts in maps. This thread seems like another I don't like do it but I want all the rewards anyway.

I think that the DF meta would be extremely fun for everyone if we could buy mistborn keys for say volatile magic. That way players that join midway through a DF meta run would not feel like they have missed out on available keys and that the meta is not worth fully completing for them.

I don't focus on doing dailies in any MMO because that becomes very repetitive and boring for me. But that being said, I think the GW2 system of dailies is very good because I am often able to do content that I enjoy and still complete dailies without having to go out and try to do it.

I don't know for sure but I suspect it has something to do with weapon skills being tied to the weapon and the way weapon swap (and other types of skill swap) work. GW2 uses a modified version of the GW1 engine and in that game you could place skills wherever you wanted on your bar, but it created some weird effects if you did anything which changed your skills. For example if you start one of the Wintersday mini games which give you special snowball themed skills and rearrange those it would also affect your normal skills - when you leave the mini game your skills will be messed up - based on where you moved the snowball skills. I don't know for sure but I suspect the same would have happened in GW2. Let's say you're using greatsword as one weapon set and sword/torch as a second set, if you swap greatsword skills 1 and 5 it would also move sword/torch skills 1 and 5...and the same would happen with any other skill sets, like engineer kits or transformations. If that's the case I imagine they weighed up the pros and cons of letting players place skills vs. being able to weapon swap and have the skills update automatically (which didn't happen in GW1 - you were stuck with the same bar even if you changed weapons) and have all these other different skill sets and decided the second option was better. It is something I miss and would use if it was available, but I've gotten used to it. Moving my skills to a more comfortable layout (in my case putting them on the number pad) helped a lot, because it meant I wasn't trying to stretch across the number keys as much. Interesting. The weapon swap and other special limited skills could indeed be a problem. I notice that sometimes in Dragonfall after using all the Dragonsblood spears I have available the skill still remains near the middle of my screen for me to press even though there are 0 spears left to use and using it then does nothing. Seems totally pointless to leave it remaining on the UI if you are unable to use it, so this may also be a symptom of this limitation.

i dont know if there was any official statement on why it's the way it is but i always thought it's because they went for action-tab hybrid leaning a bit close to action combat rather than go for a traditional tab target game where you had multiple hotbars and multiple skills. and yeah i believe some few years ago they were trying to push gw2 spvp as an e-sport but it didnt go so well so there's that too: can't have multiple hotbars and lots of fiddling around on a fast paced ~ competitive game but you can atleast rebind on your keyboard. but yeah that e-sports thing never took off Yeah I remember those days where the game was pushed hard in the e-sports scene, but ultimately failed. In MMORPGs, I usually like to re-configure my skill-bar to have the most damaging skills for 1, 2, 3 etc. and the cc/heal skills at the end, so not being able to do this when I first started playing GW2 was especially noticeable to me.

I always wondered why you can't do this too, since you can do it in a lot of other MMORPGs. I'm guessing one reason is GW2 was also designed as a competitive game so the devs wanted to make the UI and combat system the same for everyone as much as is possible. I personally don't think this would cause any problems and I think it would be a nice feature to have.