White Kitsunee.4620
-
Posts
307 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by White Kitsunee.4620
-
-
There's a lot of things I want from GW2.
But the primary thing I want is the story content to be vastly improves. But from a plotting, writing, and especially gameplay point of view.
GW is now a fantasy world I've enjoyed for almost half my life yet I still feel like most of the fun parts of it haven't been explored. But that isn't the real problem. The real problem is that I'm afraid of the devs exploring many of these interesting areas because I'm afraid they won't do a very good job with it.
Want I want from ANET is confidence. I want to think they have things under control and if the do it it will be good because ANET always does things right.
-
2
-
-
I actually think GW2:ARR or GW2.5 is really important for the steam release of the game.
The branding you get for that of "clean slate" and "new game" makes a massive difference in attracting new players. There's a huge boatload of people who tried GW2 near launch or near HoT, was interested but overall didn't enjoy the awful core content. A new xpac doesn't mean anything to them but a full revamp will. I believe it has the opportunity to bring as massive player base back to the game.
Of course I'd never dream something as radical as that Is in the works when ANET already has so many projects in the works and they are so interested in moving forwards content wise. But I think ultimately it's the only way to fix some of the major issues I think GW2 has.
-
1
-
-
It looks really silly. The old animation was fine.
-
8
-
2
-
6
-
2
-
-
33 minutes ago, Erise.5614 said:
I can understand the perspective you are coming from.
But the thing I don't understand is why the only way to "show [the fun of the system] to [players]" and "teach these players how to succeed in those formats and have fun with them" must mean "force them to play content they dislike and find frustrating".
Everything you say here is perfectly sensible. But we know for a fact that implementing difficult content does not result in what you are promoting. It has not in the past, it has not this time. There are always some. And there's usually a small community or two who stick with the content. But nothing changes in the grand scheme of things. How is more of the same gonna improve things?
Why is the only way to get people to have fun in the content to force them through frustration?
And why isn't the problem with the fact that such frustration is necessary to get there?
2 reasons and you already said one yourself.
1. Anet has tried offering safe very granulating difficult content in the form of both strikes and fractals. Strikes especially are great at teaching players the fun of getting better at a combat system and overcoming tough fights. I've run alot of groups of whisper of jormag with newbies who at the end of it had a great time progressing on a fight and finally beating it.
BUT, strikes have largely failed at getting the wider community interested in harder content. But like you said all of ANET's attempts to do so with fractals or raids or whatever have also failed.
So like... Try it again but closer to home. I think the primary issue people have with these types of content are not the content itself but both the barrier to entry and more importantly the perception of what that content is like. It doesn't matter that there are easier raids and strikes because many players have an different idea in their head of what that experience is going to be like. And because of the perception they don't even try it. So if it was well designed for them it doesn't matter.
If the open world was more challenging than these players have the opportunity to solo (the vast majority's preferred play style) at their own pace. Then, and this next part is important: actually make well designed open world mobs.
Now there is 0 barriers in the way of players experiencing what the game has to offer, once they understand that they will feel more confident to tackle the other models of gameplay.
2. I don't believe that players will A. Learn the expensive rules and mechanics of GW2 out of the game by reading things like the wiki, and B. Also that's bad game design.
So like, give players the opportunities to actually learn the game, in the game. And this comes down to have players ate funneled into content as well as mon design. Critically, mobs that do nothing don't give you an opportunity to learn, and mobs that are explicitly annoying to fight don't either.
Imagine this scenario:
Expac for introduces leveling up utility skills. These are more powerful and more fun versions of the skills you already have. But require a currency to unlock. You can only gain this currency but beating hero challenge esque missions.
Each mission is designed to stress a players understanding of the game in unique and fun ways. Or sometimes being super blunt. For example, imagine a mission where you fight an enemy that doesn't take any damage until their breakbar had been Broken. And the bar recovers fast if it hasn't been broken. This encounter has a resource every player wants and any player that completes it are forced to understand in some level of depth how burst CC works, as well as breakbars. Or maybe a mission where you have to get to an area in a strict time limit. Players who do this challenge are forced to understand their movement options in some level of depth.
Now everyone knows how this stuff works without a shadow of a doubt, and they can make mobs that reinforce that mindset. Setting players up with the information IN GAME to become better.
-
2
-
5
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Erise.5614 said:
In effect, that means they deliberately implement frustration to foster a desire for a way to overcome that frustration. And then eventually offering such a tool.
To me it feels more like the reason it has a negative reception is because a lot of players aren't as interested in having to try hard. In my opinion, implementing difficulty in open world just deters those audiences. Which is a pattern we have seen play out a good handful of times by now. They don't convert. It's not building a desire to improve. They mostly just avoid it. My interpretation of that is, they leave it be because they fundamentally don't look for that kind of experience.
Players won't understand the fun of a system until you show it to them. To me, the biggest failing of GW2 has been crafting a beautiful combat system then throwing it away but not giving people anything to stress it against. I wouldn't say ANET made good open world mobs until PoF. Those parties of Balthazar minions where fairly well designed and how mobs should have been designed from the start.
Before then. Open world mobs either did nothing (core) or were annoying to fight (HoT)
So many people arent interested in that kind of content because so many of them don't understand how fun and engaging it can be because GW2 has never onced asked that of them. That's why difficult content needs to be put in the open world. I'm not asking for the whole thing to become a murderfest, I just want parts of the map let players experience the joys of the combat system, solo. That way they don't have to find a party for fractals or dungeons, they don't have to find a guild for raids, and they don't have to find strike missions.
I think the core issue is that many players are content to just leave out major parts of the game because they don't have to do them. If ANET could both teach these players how to succeed in those formats and have fun with them, then we could see a huge rate of player attention being brought throughout many different game types again.
Edit: forgot to explain about the DPS meter lol. People that play this game aren't going to enjoy a feature they see no value in. In fact as you can see from this thread many people would be in fact be upset by this addition. Until ANET manages to make these player enjoy the kinds of content that a DPS meter would benefit, then it would be purely a net-loss for the community at large. But after Anet does that then it will be a gain for the community.
-
1
-
1
-
7
-
1
-
-
I was convinced that Joon was the main villain for most of the story. When she turned into a good guy and Minister Li was evil it just felt like something was missing. Like I had missed a key character moment or something.
while I really enjoyed EoD the story was only really enjoyable for act 1. Anet does their usual anet, make amazing open world maps with beautiful art and music and not really much else.-
5
-
1
-
-
I would enjoy the game significantly more if something like this was around, but the community in general is so aggressively against towards any ideas like this and the amount of people that would get a lot of enjoyment out of the system these days are fairly small. So it would probably be a net-loss since most of the player-base will dislike the addition, which will bring down the enjoyment of the game as a whole.
Sad to say that tools for understanding the game better would have a negative reception but it is what it is. Anet should focus on making slower, more difficult open world content that players will want to improve in the first place before they do something like this.-
3
-
6
-
2
-
-
Looks like bait but I'll bite.
So basically what your saying is you want the combat system simplified with more focus on a couple of key mechanics rather then alot of smaller different ones?
So basically what your asking is remove all of the power from traits and place them into weapon and utility skills and then make more of both to increase the variety rather then through augmenting a smaller set of weapon and utility skills.
I don't think your proposal would actually fix anything.
That wouldn't change how rock-paper-scissors the game can be at times. It would lock People into roles harder then before which would making the rock-paper-scissors aspect stronger. Without traits weapon skills would become less multi use and have more direct purpose, meaning your build would have a stronger defined role, when for example you pick hammer warrior.
I wouldn't make the game much less confusing, there would be less smaller things to learn I suppose but it wouldn't fix the game's visual clarity issue. There would still be a large amounts of builds to learn from every class and presumably classes would have a large amount more skills to learn.
It wouldn't fix the game's "P2W" critisms at all. Even if those weapon skills and utilities are available to the base class as long they are locked behind the
expansion then the same critisms remains. In fact it would be even worse. A customer that purchases only 1 expac would be at a severe disadvantage compared to someone to purchased 3 expac s.
It wouldn't fix circlewars. That's a problem with conquest's ruleset, and I think we should switch to 2v2 death match.
You're not only asking for a major restructuring of the game but also asking for the game to designed in a fundamentally different way. The same skills and attacks wouldn't fly without traits.
This design would require a large amount of increase time and resources from anet for animations.
While I do full heartedly agree that GW2 combat needs a full overhaul, I think that's the problem of the game being designed for PvE first, PvP last.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, lezbefriends.7516 said:
t is flawed thinking. Enjoy keeping this MMORPG off the radar.
Is this what you really think?
Core is what's keeping the game off the radar.
-
2
-
1
-
3
-
-
It's so much more fun and actually leans on GW2's biggest strengths. Instead of conquest which actively detracts from combat.
Would massively improve que times too.
-
4
-
2
-
12
-
-
Remove 5v5 conquest replace it with 2v2 deathwatch
-
2
-
-
Pretty sure this game has a profanity filter and iirc it already works on NPCs.
-
Quote1 hour ago, Aravind.9610 said:
This used to be mortar before they reworked it into a kit. No one liked the old mortar, it was so weak and had a minimum range away from the enemy before you could use it.
OG mortar also sucked in all ways, so it doesn't really warrant comparison
-
Holosmith as strong as if is baseline had been the problem since it was released.
-
Random idea off the top of my head.
1. Turrets no longer auto fire
2. Now turrets can be mounted and the controlling playing can fire them with controls and have a simple rotation.
3. These turrets offer surprisingly good dps and has some protection from projectiles but are stationary and have fairly limited range.
3a. Turrets specialize in burst damage over sustained damage.
4. Turrets themselves can be upgraded by the engineer by using the toolkit auto attack. These ad things like increased stats range and new attacks. However the hp of a turret slowly decays and will destroy itself if not maintained by an engineer.
5. Turrets changed to: 1. Rifle turret(close range area denial with some CC) 2. Rocket turret (long range artillery dps focused on sustained dps. As well as a healthy amount of condi dps) 3. Support station. (Very short range DPS. With main focus on boons and minor healing. Long range soft CC like immob and cripple)
4.Healing turret. (Not man-able. Short range sustained healing and resource generation. Still can be upgraded but is very vulnerable.)
5. Supply crate stays the same.
Makes turrets more interesting and interactive. You can actually make a build out of them now and have several ways to do so. Solves the afk farming issue. Isn't AI spam in PvP, isn't free safe havens or free dps in raids, prob still wouldn't work for fractals. Might be an issue in WvW but that's a balancing issue more then anything.
Only real problem with it is spamming them and making city hubs more of a mess then they already are but I don't thinks that's a big problem.
Thought on the concept?
-
4
-
-
Key farming is still a thing you can do.
Those skins always end up in the black lion statue coin shop. That's the guaranteed but slow way to get them
-
Like Guild wars 2 as a whole? Like we just had our epic conclusion and its time for something else?
I kinda felt this way at the end of Season 4, but now I really feel it.
I know there are still alot of loose ends in the story but with the ending I kinda feel like this would be a good time to call it. At least for the story. I don't really want a LWS6.
How do you guys feel about the ending? How would you feel if the story took a break for a while. In favor of anet either just doing gameplay updates or working on something else, like another xpac, or a GW3 or a new game?
-
4
-
-
Pillar humping still isn't in the game
-
Theres an old way to do it, its not through the api though.
Theres some software that can capture 3D models in games. When i get home ill see uf i cant dig it up
-
What you see as an iceberg may only be a tiny portion of it's full mass, if you look underneath the surface there's no telling how big it truly is.
I wanted to do this in honor of the End of Dragons reveal stream, and I've been working on it on-and-off ever since: Below consists of the Guildwars 2 Iceberg, it contains 8 tiers of increasingly obscure trivia.
See how far down you can get!
-
3
-
2
-
1
-
-
It's just execution.
If well written and executed upon, anything can be entertaining.
-
Want: PvP to have a staffed, dedicated team applied to it for updates.
Don't want: PvP continuing to being ignored.
-
1
-
-
I really want a tall Aurene statue.
-
People throw around the word "endgame" a lot. What is endgame?
in Guild Wars 2 Discussion
Posted
Please notice that leveling is not part of that list. This is the core difference between endgame and 'game' activities. Endgame activities are done once you've completed the main game activities involved in leveling.
In older MMOs leveling was a much more time intensive task then in GW2 so there was a much more clear difference between the two of them.