AlexxxDelta.1806

Your rig is fine and it should be able to stay at a stable 60 fps everywhere. Sadly this engine is old and cpu-taxing and no matter your CPU power, you won't be able to take full advantage. That's why you saw 35 fps in the second pic. That said, if you play with your settings a bit (as mentioned above), you can find a golden medium between best appearance and performance. You should be able to stay at 60fps in all but the most populated world bosses or wvw battles.

That's sarcasm but it could have been true if consoles didn't shake things up like they are doing these days. Now they are basically pre-built PCs which makes the whole PC vs Console debate a bit silly.

Nor does it mean it doesn't. It's all annecdotal. We have more metas and more zones than ever before, so people will be more spread out. It's basic math. Annecdotal evidence remains annecdotal. The population may be declining and the population may not be. No one on these forum knows for sure so saying either is pointless. I agree that anecdotal evidence is usually misleading, but in some areas of the game like pvp and wvw it is much easier to notice when people leave and dont come back. Many well known guilds have disappeared, server populations have been decreasing, the top 250 leaderboard contains more lower ranks. Unless they recently changed the server population limits and changed the weighting of pvp ranks then there is some evidence that populations have declined. While you may thing that PvP is one of the mainstays of the game,. it never really was. That's one of the big problems with judging populations. I have quite a few people who used to WvW in my guild all the time and now they PvE a lot. Doesn't mean those people left the game. Game modes may be doing worse or better, but it doesn't necessarily speak to the population of the game. I used to WvW a lot more and I even PvPed more. I do neither now. But I did them for specific rewards, got those rewards or at least the ones I was willing to do. We don't really know how many other people are in my boat. There aren't many WvW rewards I want to play for and it's not my preferred style of play. Talking about the health or population of the game, means you have to look at who the game is aimed at at the first place. Anet has said from day one, that they were interested in created a living breathing world. They also said, early on at a show, that they didn't even mention PvP for the first year, because they didn't want people to be under the assumption this was a PvP-centric game. That's paraphrased but it's what they said. This is because Guild Wars 1 started off as a PvP focused game and though in later years it changed to a PvE focus, it never lost that reputation. You may (or may not have) come here for the PvP, but I guarantee you the PvE playerbase was always the bulk of the game from day one. The same thing happened eventually in Guild Wars 1. Anet saw the writing on the wall and shifted their emphasis in Guild Wars 1 to PvE. I was there and I remember the complaints from PvPers when that started happening. Factions was the last product Guild Wars 1 came out with that had a PvP component. Neither Nightfall nor Eye of the North had one. PvE only skills were a big thing. PvP was left to coast. In my opinion, Anet realized what size their bread was buttered on. That's why more and more outfits, mostly used in PvE were being introduced in the gem store, even in Guild Wars 1. Populations of games shift around all the time. The game gets a casual reputation and more casuals join., You won't find most of them here, or on reddit, so they have less of a voice. But quarterly income for the game has remained roughly stable. I mean yeah it went down 5% this quarter, but consider all the recent doom and gloom, that's realliy nothing. And when you add to the fact that years ago, we had the same sorts of numbers in the cool down period after Heart of Thorns...yeah, the game is stable. It may not be you or your friends playing but my casual guild is still pretty much as active as it's always been. It's just a different game. It wasn't aimed at the PvP crowd to begin with. You say anecdotal evidence and numbers from modes like PvP aren't sufficient and you may be right. Only Anet has the full picture. The best we can do is describe how the game feels to each of us individually. But the same can be said about using quarterly income to judge anything population related. Tinker a bit with monetization, focus a bit more on milking whales (successfully) and theoretically, you could keep income stable with fewer active players. In fact, it's legit strategy that's not new in MMOs. As the game ages, the studio tries to milk the property for all it's worth. Except that as one of those whales I spend significantly less than I used to and I used to spend a lot. But now, I don't really need more outfits. I have all the storage expansion I can buy. I have enough glider skins to open a showroom. I buy very few skins comparatively. I'm not particularly into chairs. ....I have no reason to doubt that you are doing just that. And that would be yet more... anecdotal evidence (it works both ways). Just because you are spending less, doesn't mean every whale is spending less. Between BLC exclusives, mountskins and new monetized mechanics like templates, there is plenty to spend on. I do agree though that the game is obviously not dead. The "feed on whales" scheme doesn't work when the population has reached critical levels. After all, one needs someone to beat with their store bought might (in p2w games) or someone to show off their store-bought shinies to (in our case). Can't do that in an empty world. I'm just saying that in my personal experience, as a mainly PvE player, it feels noticeably less active than it used to be. Both inside and outside (and yes, outside matters too).

Nor does it mean it doesn't. It's all annecdotal. We have more metas and more zones than ever before, so people will be more spread out. It's basic math. Annecdotal evidence remains annecdotal. The population may be declining and the population may not be. No one on these forum knows for sure so saying either is pointless. I agree that anecdotal evidence is usually misleading, but in some areas of the game like pvp and wvw it is much easier to notice when people leave and dont come back. Many well known guilds have disappeared, server populations have been decreasing, the top 250 leaderboard contains more lower ranks. Unless they recently changed the server population limits and changed the weighting of pvp ranks then there is some evidence that populations have declined. While you may thing that PvP is one of the mainstays of the game,. it never really was. That's one of the big problems with judging populations. I have quite a few people who used to WvW in my guild all the time and now they PvE a lot. Doesn't mean those people left the game. Game modes may be doing worse or better, but it doesn't necessarily speak to the population of the game. I used to WvW a lot more and I even PvPed more. I do neither now. But I did them for specific rewards, got those rewards or at least the ones I was willing to do. We don't really know how many other people are in my boat. There aren't many WvW rewards I want to play for and it's not my preferred style of play. Talking about the health or population of the game, means you have to look at who the game is aimed at at the first place. Anet has said from day one, that they were interested in created a living breathing world. They also said, early on at a show, that they didn't even mention PvP for the first year, because they didn't want people to be under the assumption this was a PvP-centric game. That's paraphrased but it's what they said. This is because Guild Wars 1 started off as a PvP focused game and though in later years it changed to a PvE focus, it never lost that reputation. You may (or may not have) come here for the PvP, but I guarantee you the PvE playerbase was always the bulk of the game from day one. The same thing happened eventually in Guild Wars 1. Anet saw the writing on the wall and shifted their emphasis in Guild Wars 1 to PvE. I was there and I remember the complaints from PvPers when that started happening. Factions was the last product Guild Wars 1 came out with that had a PvP component. Neither Nightfall nor Eye of the North had one. PvE only skills were a big thing. PvP was left to coast. In my opinion, Anet realized what size their bread was buttered on. That's why more and more outfits, mostly used in PvE were being introduced in the gem store, even in Guild Wars 1. Populations of games shift around all the time. The game gets a casual reputation and more casuals join., You won't find most of them here, or on reddit, so they have less of a voice. But quarterly income for the game has remained roughly stable. I mean yeah it went down 5% this quarter, but consider all the recent doom and gloom, that's realliy nothing. And when you add to the fact that years ago, we had the same sorts of numbers in the cool down period after Heart of Thorns...yeah, the game is stable. It may not be you or your friends playing but my casual guild is still pretty much as active as it's always been. It's just a different game. It wasn't aimed at the PvP crowd to begin with.You say anecdotal evidence and numbers from modes like PvP aren't sufficient and you may be right. Only Anet has the full picture. The best we can do is describe how the game feels to each of us individually. But the same can be said about using quarterly income to judge anything population related. Tinker a bit with monetization, focus a bit more on milking whales (successfully) and theoretically, you could keep income stable with fewer active players. In fact, it's legit strategy that's not new in MMOs. As the game ages, the studio tries to milk the property for all it's worth.

A game doesn't need to be at death's door to have a population decline. In fact, it would be an anomaly to not have a population decline for a MMO of that age. Older players leave and there is no way to match the new player influx of the earlier years. Especially not without the media hype of expansions. Decline is natural. The real question is if it has a more severe drop than expected and if there are specific periods/events in a game's life that accelerated that decline. In my (purely anecdotal ofc) evidence, GW2's active population has declined a lot in the past couple of years. It's not a drop that makes it unplayable but anyone who has been in the game a long time can see the difference in metas, lfg, guild lists, friends etc. The "feel" I get from the game (feel, because my numbers would mean nothing coming from just one person) can only be compared with the post-HoT drought to me. And even then, the community itself was really active outside the game (forums, reddit, youtube/twitch, fan-sites). It's noticeably less lively today. Yes and look where that got WoW. Controversy, more complaints, people leaving, and them forced to reboot their age old vanilla version of the game that got jeopardized because of more stupid mistakes/controversy. WoW ain't the best canidate nowadays. Despite its age and shortcomings, WoW is still the market leader by a wide margin. Comfortable enough to make an arguably dubious investment in vanilla, trying to make more bank on nostalgia. I would consider having the ability to make risky investments that have mediocre results, a better alternative to not having the ability at all.

This poll is like asking what kind of fancy decor you want for your brand new house, while living on the street.

The evolution of sub-based to buy-to-play to buy-to-play-cashshop to optional sub has been the markets reply to gamers saying what if. I think I spend more on games that are just cash shop and that allows people that are never cash shop to get free content. Personally I think for me the best bang for the buck is the optional sub. Now that will draw out the people that call for pay to win, but it's easier than forcing everyone into a sub. Under a sub, yes you have reasons to get online since you are paying for it and I think it also gives people more reason to say, hey this bug needs fixed now, not in 5 months, hey that feature, when are we getting it, we will go till it's addressed. Without that I think companies lose metrics to address issues and they can use the marketing card of we are working on it and no we don't need to talk to you about it. Forum goers in buy to play games are more likely to counter other posters where in sub-based games there is more voices behind, why isn't this fixed or this feature could use improvements, at least in my own experience. I admit I have done this myself here and try and keep that checked. Not there now, but take Bethesda and Fallout 76, Fallout only people are up in arms about Fallout First but a number of ESO players that are used to the model are, what's up, this is a value add. So it does come down to perspective and what people are expecting. Take a number of upcoming MMOs, they are planning on sub-based from the gate even though they know it might make them more niche markets. Again personally I expect most will continue to move to a la carte pricing models to try and match as many player expectations as possible and still acquire revenue and ongoing development dollars. I also expect players that are willing to pay for a sub saying what does that get me and others that will come out and say if you get anything from a sub that I don't by doing just a buy-to-play then its pay to win. To that end we all need to try and keep things in check since the middle ground is there should be value in paying more since you paid more but if we can prevent everyone from a sub we might get the most number of players out of the deal and MMOs need players, but we should also avoid things like gold rounds in World Of Tanks that means one on one the person shooting gold will win. Good gaming where you find it! You know a way to get the most number of players out of the deal? Make an exceptional game that players love playing and keep supporting it in the long run. Either through purely cosmetic mtx or the now extinct "store-less" subscription. But obviously that's harder and more costly, so we have to find ways to fleece players with thinly veiled p2w like optional subs.

You are posting this question in the forums of a game that used the "no sub" part, as one of its main selling points. So take a guess (or read through any of the previous threads about this, we have plenty of those).

I couldn't vote because I wouldn't restrict a new expansion's major feature to just new movement. I'm not even sure there is space for new movement methods. It would still have to be something similarly game-changing though and yet more mounts wouldn't be that. PoF's main feature wasn't ....more gliders. The whole discussion is moot though as they are not planning one.

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/91126/official-feedback-thread-about-build-and-equipment-templates#latest People have such a high demand from a F2P game that only lives from microtransactions. I feel like I'm trapped in a perpetuum mobile whenever I read comments like these. ;) Please take the time to delve into the system fully and you will discover its flaws. In any case, we don't have "high demands". On the contrary:Our only demand is for things to work properly without screwing anything up (regardless of the system's immense limitation with its 6-slots limit or the pricing).GW1 itself, as well as a free GW2 3rd party tool, used to do everything perfectly, the way people who actually have use of templates needed it to work. Both systems were much simpler in their functionality, yet more efficient. Asking for something "simpler" is the exact opposite of "having high demands", no? Think like a business as well as what you have currently. You know that the people in charge would (usually) do the best if they could, they are paid for it. Or even better if you could be paid to make it better you should be the one applying for said situation. There's clearly only so much that can be done but we are stuck arguing about the possibilities when it's right there in front of you that nothing is going to change. It's evident that free is only gonna go so far. Also it seems to go right above everyone's mind that they are trying to keep a margin of profit over their revenue by giving people features that they want but not in excess, anyway behold the complains are still there and we want everything for free and permanently with even less motives to give a dying label a reason to move on. People took the third party tool for granted and that's where it stops for me. The current templates has only a few flaws outside the whole contreversial paywall that is always surprising to people but no different than the rest of features that you'd have to pay for including character slots effectively giving you more per gem in the end. (Yeah, real humans work there for you!) It's also evident that the equipment sharing is driven by the idea of keeping the economy going, I could understand if they didn't do it for Ascended but they should given it's account bound, for Legendary gear it's completely whack because they are advertised and feature as the "never struggle with you armor again" kind of mentality AND the system goes against by forcing template destruction which is my complete non sense from any point but resource that don't really make players want to spend more real cash, just time. If it had to be this way even for legendary armor, there's clearly a need for resource reduction they want to achieve. Because those people who are going to swap that legendary gear will be spending transmutation charges in which depending what kind of player you are, those are also sometimes bought on the gemstore by others, so it keeps one sort of revenue regardless unlike having people with 6 other sets that will rarely ever change. This could apply to ascended though, since some people just roll Berserker gear on everything.Thinking like a business is needed at times because it helps one understand all the ways they are trying to milk our accounts dry. Recognizing them is one thing but actually supporting them when I'm a consumer, would be nonsensical as it would be opposite to my interests. I don't really get this "urban myth" of a free game. This game had a box price for its core and its expansions. On top of that, it's a proven fact that its main revenue stream ( microtransactions), has been the most profitable model in the history of gaming business. Even the minority of late comers who got core for free and never upgraded or spent a dime on the store are helping the model work with their engagement in the MMO. Presenting Anet to be a poor studio, struggling to keep the lights on, is a poor attempt to justify questionable decisions. There are no "free" games period. I would have thought the insane profits of the mostly "free" mobile market would have been a hint.

Maybe because no solution can be offered when looking at the issue through the narrow scope of a single game. These problems are industry-wide and that's where change needs to happen. I would argue OP at least attempts to look at it through a broader scope. It's not big deal for you, but maybe it is for me and others. I don't have to agree with something just because it's a business model. And I sure don't need to re-invent the consumer-provider relationship to voice my complaint about it. I can choose to both stop supporting financially said service and voice my complaints about it just fine. Especially since it's a proven fact that when those complaints pile up, change is more likely to happen. Social media in the age of Information are pretty useful like that. One could just pick another service to support if the industry in its current form offered a variety of choices and business models. Sadly that's not a reality as more and more studios are making games employing those practices. So as gamer/consumer I have two choices ; either I find a new hobby or I choose to support the few who haven't been "corrupted" yet and join the many voices who complain about the rest in hope of a change. I pick the latter as the effort to do so is minimal. Just a few taps on my phone. What I said still holds true, even if it's industry wide. If more people think like you, the industry will adapt to better serve it's market. The problem with this line of thinking is that the industry has found a way to increase their earnings more than ever by prioritizing catering to minorities instead of the majority. So no, it's not a matter of how many are thinking this way, as long as enough players on the other side have deep pockets and lack of self-control. I do agree that in the end market will correct itself, because minnows have started to wake up and recognize their favorite past time is not targeting them anymore. And you can't have MMOs without the massive part. But it will take time.

Maybe because no solution can be offered when looking at the issue through the narrow scope of a single game. These problems are industry-wide and that's where change needs to happen. I would argue OP at least attempts to look at it through a broader scope. It's not big deal for you, but maybe it is for me and others. I don't have to agree with something just because it's a business model. And I sure don't need to re-invent the consumer-provider relationship to voice my complaint about it. I can choose to both stop supporting financially said service and voice my complaints about it just fine. Especially since it's a proven fact that when those complaints pile up, change is more likely to happen. Social media in the age of Information are pretty useful like that. One could just pick another service to support if the industry in its current form offered a variety of choices and business models. Sadly that's not a reality as more and more studios are making games employing those practices. So as gamer/consumer I have two choices ; either I find a new hobby or I choose to support the few who haven't been "corrupted" yet and join the many voices who complain about the rest in hope of a change. I pick the latter as the effort to do so is minimal. Just a few taps on my phone.

Cos that kind of rude response is going to encourage ANET to converse with us rather than cl ose off the thread entirely.Whilst I too don't expect a miracle solution to the template issues highlighted in the feedback that has been forthcoming from the players both prior to (which ANET openly requested) and after it's implementation...there are better ways to convey your thoughts and feelings imo. i disagree, if people keep showing they are upset, they will have to answer us eventually. Requesting feedback means nothing if you don't actually listen to it. Disagree all you like but ANET will likely either infract and delete rude posts, close the thread or both.They don't have to say or do anything, so no they don't have to eventually a need especially to rude posts..Personally I would just give them some time and space to collate everything, fix bugs and then maybe we might get something back by way of response. There are plenty of examples of gamer outcry that has had results. It all depends on the "strength" of the complaints and how much noise they create in media outside the narrow confines of a game's community. "Mountgate" created a kittenstorm in forums and reddit and bled out to mainstream gaming media. Anet was forced to respond and backtrack a bit, although not to the extent players wanted. Same with HoT as you mentioned. And there are even stronger cases outside GW, like the whole Battlefront debacle. It's all a matter of circumstances being right to create a good social media "storm". In an age where studios can make bank by catering to minorities instead of the majority, social media "outrage" is the best weapon gamers have. ANET were not forced to do anything, they took on board feedback, much like what's being requested now, just that some can't wait to pick up pitchforks and light the torches, others just cry rudeness cos they like to.Previously ANET offered a half way house solution in terms of mount licences, and that imo was a good move.. with HoT they appeased vets by offering an extra slot. Neither had to be done, they chose to.. they could of done neither and players would still be here playing and whining about anything and everything.. me included. By the same logic, EA chose to remove p2w lootboxes in Battlefront. Do you think they wanted to? It was a reaction to player outrage. Anet wouldn't have changed a thing about licenses or HoT without the player complaints. Sitting in silent protest and waiting for some change to magically happen for no reason, makes no sense. The notion that no matter what's happening, players will always be here playing, is false. It's like saying a previously good restaurant can start serving horrid food, dish after dish, and keep surviving long term on fame alone. It won't. Keeping vets happy becomes more important as a MMO ages. Because the influx of new players will always dwindle with age, as the hype of novelty dies. Retention equals survival after a certain point. Templates were a highly desired QoL for the playerbase for sure, but to bring that to fruition it has taken resource and now it needs to see a return on the effort, whether we like it or not - and that is the true power players have, if we don't like it we simply don't open our wallets. No matter how much huff and puff we put out on forums and reddits, it is ANET that ultimately decides if there is some wiggle room with build templates and what they can offer. They are in no way forced to do it, but if the numbers aren't working out as well as they hoped then perhaps that might encourage them to do something.."Vote with your wallet" is a myth and it simply doesn't work in today's gaming, when a whale's " vote" is worth so much more. What works, is creating enough negative buzz to hurt a company's public image. Something that's easier than ever in the age of social media. I'm not saying the current template debacle is an issue that will achieve negative buzz of that magnitude. I'm just saying that, in general, players would be stupid not to use a tool so powerful.

Cos that kind of rude response is going to encourage ANET to converse with us rather than cl ose off the thread entirely.Whilst I too don't expect a miracle solution to the template issues highlighted in the feedback that has been forthcoming from the players both prior to (which ANET openly requested) and after it's implementation...there are better ways to convey your thoughts and feelings imo. i disagree, if people keep showing they are upset, they will have to answer us eventually. Requesting feedback means nothing if you don't actually listen to it. Disagree all you like but ANET will likely either infract and delete rude posts, close the thread or both.They don't have to say or do anything, so no they don't have to eventually a need especially to rude posts..Personally I would just give them some time and space to collate everything, fix bugs and then maybe we might get something back by way of response. There are plenty of examples of gamer outcry that has had results. It all depends on the "strength" of the complaints and how much noise they create in media outside the narrow confines of a game's community. "Mountgate" created a kittenstorm in forums and reddit and bled out to mainstream gaming media. Anet was forced to respond and backtrack a bit, although not to the extent players wanted. Same with HoT as you mentioned. And there are even stronger cases outside GW, like the whole Battlefront debacle. It's all a matter of circumstances being right to create a good social media "storm". In an age where studios can make bank by catering to minorities instead of the majority, social media "outrage" is the best weapon gamers have. ANET were not forced to do anything, they took on board feedback, much like what's being requested now, just that some can't wait to pick up pitchforks and light the torches, others just cry rudeness cos they like to.Previously ANET offered a half way house solution in terms of mount licences, and that imo was a good move.. with HoT they appeased vets by offering an extra slot. Neither had to be done, they chose to.. they could of done neither and players would still be here playing and whining about anything and everything.. me included.By the same logic, EA chose to remove p2w lootboxes in Battlefront. Do you think they wanted to? It was a reaction to player outrage. Anet wouldn't have changed a thing about licenses or HoT without the player complaints. Sitting in silent protest and waiting for some change to magically happen for no reason, makes no sense. The notion that no matter what's happening, players will always be here playing, is false. It's like saying a previously good restaurant can start serving horrid food, dish after dish, and keep surviving long term on fame alone. It won't. Keeping vets happy becomes more important as a MMO ages. Because the influx of new players will always dwindle with age, as the hype of novelty dies. Retention equals survival after a certain point.

It's still too early to announce any major changes. No matter how many forum threads and reddit posts they have, the feedback that matters to them the most is the gem store. If the results from there are positive, don't expect anything major. I doubt sales will be up to expectations in their current form but you never know, people will waste money on anything these days. Cos that kind of rude response is going to encourage ANET to converse with us rather than cl ose off the thread entirely.Whilst I too don't expect a miracle solution to the template issues highlighted in the feedback that has been forthcoming from the players both prior to (which ANET openly requested) and after it's implementation...there are better ways to convey your thoughts and feelings imo. i disagree, if people keep showing they are upset, they will have to answer us eventually. Requesting feedback means nothing if you don't actually listen to it. Disagree all you like but ANET will likely either infract and delete rude posts, close the thread or both.They don't have to say or do anything, so no they don't have to eventually a need especially to rude posts..Personally I would just give them some time and space to collate everything, fix bugs and then maybe we might get something back by way of response.There are plenty of examples of gamer outcry that has had results. It all depends on the "strength" of the complaints and how much noise they create in media outside the narrow confines of a game's community. "Mountgate" created a kittenstorm in forums and reddit and bled out to mainstream gaming media. Anet was forced to respond and backtrack a bit, although not to the extent players wanted. Same with HoT as you mentioned. And there are even stronger cases outside GW, like the whole Battlefront debacle. It's all a matter of circumstances being right to create a good social media "storm". In an age where studios can make bank by catering to minorities instead of the majority, social media "outrage" is the best weapon gamers have.

If a major MMO studio needs to cease development in order to fix a broken feature, they better close shop and do something else.

anet wont come out and tell u unless they had to but some outlets with good track record havw come out to share information they've got. You mean Kotaku? Lol Every outlet refers to that article. Pmuch, they have released multiple hit articles with information on internal development of games and moreq and pmuch all of them are regarded very highly. And yet this article was highly speculative based solely on an “anonymous source”. Let’s also not forget that highly biased article from a year ago when they fired two employees. Oh and that “well researched” article earlier this year about a word which may or may not have been in a song in Smash Bros. Kotaku's opinion pieces are often controversial and politically influenced. But when it comes to insider info, they are among the best in the business (probably because many in the industry share those same leanings). I can't count the amount of hit stories they broke first while everyone else was sleeping. Anet related stuff included. And those type of pieces can only come from anonymous sources. Unless those sources are keen on facing consequences for breaking NDA.

No, it isn't. You spend money on gambling for the 'thrill' of gambling, just as if you paid $5.00 to ride a roller coaster. The mistake is thinking that you are spending money on gambling in order to win something; that's just the cherry on the sundae. If you decide to gamble you are making that mistake by definition. Nobody gambles with absolutely no expectation to win anything. If that was the case nobody would gamble, as it would be an identical action to throwing your money away. The expectation is always there, even sub-consciously. It's that expectation that creates the "thrill" of the process, no matter how small your chances are.

The amount is irrelevant. Any amount of money is wasted by default when spent on gambling. It's like throwing money into a fire and complaining because they got burnt.

There's enough gem store items that QOL untilities don't need to be monitized and in a fashion that doesn't even come close to what we had before....I buy gem store items all the time with real money. I am very dissapointedd that a QOL feature is monitized and is also not as capable as it predesessor. That doesn't make sense. The expectation is ALWAYS going to be that Anet sells features as a service to players, just like EVERYTHING else you, me or any other player has ever got in the game from them... REGARDLESS of your opinion if there is enough gem store items (yeah .. because you walk into a regular store and think the same thing ... this thing I want should be free because the store if FULL of other stuff!!!). To expect anything else is unreasonable and implies sense of entitlement. Furthermore, it has no predecessor; this is the first time Anet is offering this feature to players. Nice analogy there but you are forgetting one thing, this is a video game we are talking about, not a store. I know it's really hard to tell them apart these days but still...

30$, the price of the last expansion, for just specs. Seems fair! If you wanna go the pw2 route, better go all out I guess... On one hand I kinda want this to happen. Stories of dev hubris being punished are always entertaining. In addition, seeing the flimsy argument against any kind of criticism towards the gem store being destroyed could also be amusing. "It's just cosmetic/convenience, not pw2, so stop whining." Well not anymore! On the other hand, I still consider this to be a good MMOrpg with potential to grow despite its age. Having its devs shooting themselves on the foot would be a shame. Especially for a game that used to be the gold standard (highest rated MMOrpg in many publications/sites at launch). You sound like you're a bit entitled mate, If they don't release E-specs people will leave. If they do people will be upset; I Feel like people being upset but getting over it is fine. And let me be clear you didn't read the post at all I said in there that people can pay individually for specs, its not pay to win as core can compete and often beat E-specs. You either don't play the game at all or are trolling because we have seen core specs and core classes become very powerful over the previous reworks I mean Core necromancer in my opinion vastly over-shadows the elite specs. A core necromancer has so many tools and tricks where as the others get limited as reaper is primarily in melee range during its shroud and its Weapon is not very good in WvW or PvP because of how it functions. (You do not want to try and out box a warrior on reaper, a warrior has so many tools that will clap you its hilarious.) So no its not pay to win, its paying for what is essentially new classes and new ways to play. Which is fair enough considering the level of work required by E-specs and the amount of time it takes to develop them and their trait-lines + The little cosmetic thing you get with them. ONTOP of the collection after unlocking them, so no I feel 30$ is fair for ALL of them in a pack. But you don't need to spend that much and can buy the ones you like which is a huge boon because there are tons of E-specs I didn't like in PoF that I didn't want and don't play. I still unlocked them just to have them there but they were not and ARE NOT a necessity to play the game, you still need to buy PoF to get into the Saga is that pay to win? Build templates. IS that pay to win? Because that feature in of itself is far larger and more encompassing than E-specs, Every single game charges for additional content and guild wars doesn't. E-specs are one of the few things im ok with them charging for simply because its always been something we paid for, Thirty dollars for Nine E-specs essentially nine new classes and HUNDREDS of hours of replay-ability is NOT pay to win. You don't like it? Don't buy it. No one is making you but if you think for one moment that this is pay to win, then I have bad news for you. NO GAME GIVES OUT STUFF LIKE THIS FOR FREE, NOT EVER. You claim you see potential? Reaching it needs funds, and us buying the E-specs is funding for more of them. If they were to prove not to be lucrative im sure A-net would leave it be and never, ever, ever make a new one again. Hell we might already be there so its either we prepare to pay for them or sit here and not get anything new, because maps and story will NOT continue this games life-span. Living world Seasons 1 + 2 proved this when the community began drizzling out, I was one of them because at this point im well aware that the writing and story will never be better than a Sci-fi movie (The original movies with low budgets.) hell even most of them are better, do you really assume that plus some masteries will sate people? No it will just drive the population further into the ground. You've never seen pay to win, now Archeage in its original form and BDO is pay to win. Hell even ESO is pay to win at least it is further than this game EVER will be, that game pulls ALL OF THE CONTENT APART. And then it has the audacity to sell it back to you Or you can pay the optional sub and get everything, but the moment you stop you won't be able to play your characters if they happen to be expansion characters (Warden or necromancer.) Or you can spend the exuberant amounts of money to buy it all individually... That is what I constituent as pay to win and this is not that. And Im sure you know that.... so stop beating a dead horse. Devs release new specs. Some of these specs result in broken builds that are blatantly overpowered compared to previous builds. They become meta, everyone is using them and they are required in groups. Using them allows one to get in groups, perform and complete both PvP and PvE content with more ease. AKA helps one win at this game. Said specs are up for sale. One needs to pay to obtain them. But it's not P2W!!! ....Seems legit. I mean it's in bold for emphasis so it has to be.... Also might want to try closing without a moral equivalence "not as bad as" type of argument next time. I feel like you and people like you are 100% the problem with out community, everything is pay to win. New races? Would be pay to win due to fashion wars. Mounts? Those obviously are pay to win. According to you and those like you they shouldn't add anything new once so ever PERIOD because like I said which you glossed over to even get into the saga YOU STILL NEED TO OWN PoF so the expansion is still a must have to even see the new content. So it must be P2W, clearly you're ignorant to how the rest of the market is and how other games work and won't hear it because IF YOU SCREAM THE LOUDEST NO ONE CAN DISAGREE RIGHT!?!? That said have a good day, and best of luck finding a game that is exactly what you're looking for. Clearly this game is not that for you, and no matter what they do you will never be satisfied or happy because everything by your logic is pay to win. So if that is the case why bother staying? Let me add there will never be another expansion, at least not as it stands now. A-net is standing against them and don't want them, they want living world so if you stick to only with expansions well then~ No new anything for your class will come. Just sayingThe main reason I'm still playing this game, instead of something else from the toxic cesspool that is the MMO market, is that it still hasn't crossed the very lines you are suggesting it should.

Really the only difference between an expansion and living story is "act now and get this for just four easy payments of $9.99!" That's objectively false. There is a considerable difference in scope between the two. The amount of brand new assets that came into the game with HoT (meshes, textures, sounds, music, VA) is larger than the sum of LS3 and 4 for example. And that's just one aspect. Another would be the amount of major game-changing features introduced with expansions vs LS. It's not even close. Would you consider it pay-to-win if the new elite specs objectively DO NOT provide any sort of mathematically significant increase in your character's overall capability? If that was the case and they were true side-grades, no it wouldn't be p2w. But that hasn't been the case so far. Even if one new spec is better at a certain type of content than an existing one, the bundle becomes p2w by definition. And while I think the initial powercreep from base to elite was intentional, I don't think that's the case anymore. It seems the specs are becoming too many and too complex to balance properly in all modes, so I don't trust them to make true side-grades even if they intend to do so.

30$, the price of the last expansion, for just specs. Seems fair! If you wanna go the pw2 route, better go all out I guess... On one hand I kinda want this to happen. Stories of dev hubris being punished are always entertaining. In addition, seeing the flimsy argument against any kind of criticism towards the gem store being destroyed could also be amusing. "It's just cosmetic/convenience, not pw2, so stop whining." Well not anymore! On the other hand, I still consider this to be a good MMOrpg with potential to grow despite its age. Having its devs shooting themselves on the foot would be a shame. Especially for a game that used to be the gold standard (highest rated MMOrpg in many publications/sites at launch). You sound like you're a bit entitled mate, If they don't release E-specs people will leave. If they do people will be upset; I Feel like people being upset but getting over it is fine. And let me be clear you didn't read the post at all I said in there that people can pay individually for specs, its not pay to win as core can compete and often beat E-specs. You either don't play the game at all or are trolling because we have seen core specs and core classes become very powerful over the previous reworks I mean Core necromancer in my opinion vastly over-shadows the elite specs. A core necromancer has so many tools and tricks where as the others get limited as reaper is primarily in melee range during its shroud and its Weapon is not very good in WvW or PvP because of how it functions. (You do not want to try and out box a warrior on reaper, a warrior has so many tools that will clap you its hilarious.) So no its not pay to win, its paying for what is essentially new classes and new ways to play. Which is fair enough considering the level of work required by E-specs and the amount of time it takes to develop them and their trait-lines + The little cosmetic thing you get with them. ONTOP of the collection after unlocking them, so no I feel 30$ is fair for ALL of them in a pack. But you don't need to spend that much and can buy the ones you like which is a huge boon because there are tons of E-specs I didn't like in PoF that I didn't want and don't play. I still unlocked them just to have them there but they were not and ARE NOT a necessity to play the game, you still need to buy PoF to get into the Saga is that pay to win? Build templates. IS that pay to win? Because that feature in of itself is far larger and more encompassing than E-specs, Every single game charges for additional content and guild wars doesn't. E-specs are one of the few things im ok with them charging for simply because its always been something we paid for, Thirty dollars for Nine E-specs essentially nine new classes and HUNDREDS of hours of replay-ability is NOT pay to win. You don't like it? Don't buy it. No one is making you but if you think for one moment that this is pay to win, then I have bad news for you. NO GAME GIVES OUT STUFF LIKE THIS FOR FREE, NOT EVER. You claim you see potential? Reaching it needs funds, and us buying the E-specs is funding for more of them. If they were to prove not to be lucrative im sure A-net would leave it be and never, ever, ever make a new one again. Hell we might already be there so its either we prepare to pay for them or sit here and not get anything new, because maps and story will NOT continue this games life-span. Living world Seasons 1 + 2 proved this when the community began drizzling out, I was one of them because at this point im well aware that the writing and story will never be better than a Sci-fi movie (The original movies with low budgets.) hell even most of them are better, do you really assume that plus some masteries will sate people? No it will just drive the population further into the ground. You've never seen pay to win, now Archeage in its original form and BDO is pay to win. Hell even ESO is pay to win at least it is further than this game EVER will be, that game pulls ALL OF THE CONTENT APART. And then it has the audacity to sell it back to you Or you can pay the optional sub and get everything, but the moment you stop you won't be able to play your characters if they happen to be expansion characters (Warden or necromancer.) Or you can spend the exuberant amounts of money to buy it all individually... That is what I constituent as pay to win and this is not that. And Im sure you know that.... so stop beating a dead horse.Devs release new specs. Some of these specs result in broken builds that are blatantly overpowered compared to previous builds. They become meta, everyone is using them and they are required in groups. Using them allows one to get in groups, perform and complete both PvP and PvE content with more ease. AKA helps one win at this game. Said specs are up for sale. One needs to pay to obtain them. But it's not P2W!!! ....Seems legit. I mean it's in bold for emphasis so it has to be.... Also might want to try closing without a moral equivalence "not as bad as" type of argument next time.

30$, the price of the last expansion, for just specs. Seems fair! If you wanna go the pw2 route, better go all out I guess... On one hand I kinda want this to happen. Stories of dev hubris being punished are always entertaining. In addition, seeing the flimsy argument against any kind of criticism towards the gem store being destroyed could also be amusing. "It's just cosmetic/convenience, not pw2, so stop whining." Well not anymore! On the other hand, I still consider this to be a good MMOrpg with potential to grow despite its age. Having its devs shooting themselves on the foot would be a shame. Especially for a game that used to be the gold standard (highest rated MMOrpg in many publications/sites at launch).

Many things in gaming were free in the 00s that aren't anymore. We live in the age of "pay to pay" model for some time now. "Playing" is just an afterthought and just there to keep the "paying" going. And since most seem really happy to keep "paying to pay" the trend can only continue. " AnEt tAke mY mOneY NAO" posts, asking for features any older gamer used to take for granted, are pretty common after all.