TheRev.6293

Then this makes sense. If you don't have another monitor, there's no other screen for the cursor to slip to, so you won't have it going to another screen.

#2 happens so often to me it's so irritating. Maybe cause I move my mouse really fast and rotate my camera really fast. Also, how many monitors you have? I have monitors in all directions but bottom, so it happens to me in any direction but donwards. #3 For sure needs to be an option. You can cancel targets with 'esc' already, so you don't really need to click anything. Clicking doesn't make much sense cause you can actually click an UI element or another enemy, or an ally, or anything in reality, while 'esc' makes sure you are cancelling your target having no room for mistake. That said, I understand some people don't know 'esc' will cancel target or don't want to use it because maybe it's a far key or other reasons, so a checkbox would be ideal.

So, there are 3 main things that happen in this game that really annoy me, and probably many more people. The two first ones are definetly bugs, and the third one is an improvement request. 1 - When holding right mouse button (to move camera around) and hovering the invisible cursor over any UI elements, that element is going to steal focus. What this means is that if you hold your RMB to move the camera around, and then you rotate you're camera a bit, the invisible cursor behind is actually moving, so it happens to be on the minimap for example, while you zoom in/out, it will zoom in/out the minimap instad of the camera. This is so annoying that it makes using minimap not worth it unles you use action camera (which has its own problems). This will also happen for the chat or any other UI element. I just suggest that zoom in/out will always work for the camera while you're holding RMB, and no UI elements, or that UI elements will not steal focus while you're holding RMB to rotate the camera. 2 - Holding RMB or LMB on the corner of the screen, and moving the cursor into that direction and releasing the click, makes it that your cursor will actually leave the game screen (this is on fullscreen btw), effectively making you have to alt tab back into the game and move the mouse back to the game. This is awful as it often means you're going to die because the cursor suddenly moved into another screen. This happens at least once every 5 minutes for me. I suggest making it so that when you're holding LMB and RMB you cannot make the cursor leave the game's window if you have multiple monitors while in fullscreen. 3 - While you have a target, clicking on no element with LMB will make you lose your target. For example, if you have a target, and you're attacking it, then you accidentaly click the ground, you'll lose your target, forcing you to click it again or pressing 'tab' to get target again. Auto-target is not a fix for this as auto-target will often get a different target than you had. I suggest making it so that we can enable an option in the settings to prevent losing target from clicking the ground with LMB. I'm sure there are many other bugs out there and that maybe this isn't the top priority. But I believe #1 and #3 are fairly easy to solve, and #2 is probably something related to the game engine itself. I've already submitted in-game bug reports, but I never got word back. If you also face those issues, plese comment here so that the devs can assess how big of a problem this is. But I'm pretty confident from what I've searched that many people face the same issues. Thank you!

Not sure if this is the right place, but I'm having a lot of problems with mouse and camera in this game. For some context, I have 3 monitors and I'm using windows 10 professional edition. If I have my cursor in-game in the border of the screen (in fullscreen mode), and if I hold RMB or LMB and move to the direction of the next screen (I do this to rotate the camera as I'll never play in action mode), my cursor will actually leave the game screen and go to the next screen, usually meaning that I'll have to bring my cursor back to the game and click anywhere to focus on it again. The second problem, is that when holding RMB or LMB and moving the mouse around (while my cursor is invisible) to rotate my camera, if my invisible cursor happen to be hovering over other UI elements (like the minimap or chat), and I zoom in/out, it will actually zoom in/out that UI element instead of the camera zoom, so I often mess my minimap zoom or I simply cannot zoom in/out my camera because its rolling up/down the chat. I'm leaning towards those being bugs that happen for every user but I'm not 100% sure. Thank you!

The question might be the same, but the situation is different now in my view. I also didn't find other posts that talk about it under the same angle that I did. Thank you for your concerns with the CoC though.

Those are good takes, but I wouldn't say that playing with 180 or 200ms doesn't justify a server here. 180 or 200ms is a lot compared to 10 or 20 ms which is what I get in games that have servers in here (São Paulo usually). Especially for pvp, for me it's unplayable with that ping, but in PVE I can manage, even tho it bothers me a lot. Also a lot of friends of mine will not play GW2 because they would rather play other MMORPGs with 30ms than to play GW2 with 200ms. So again, I think it justifies a lot, as I believe this is one of the reasons the game doesn't have more people playing it. If you don't reach for other continents then you're not going to have a lot of players anyway. I still think they should do the test of opening servers here and seeing how it goes over a few months. If it doesn't have enough people than they could ask the community if they'd prefer to play with 180-220ms on US servers, or to play with 20ms on a lower population server. A simple poll for SA players could get that sorted out.

This makes perfect sense. Thank you. I've never worked on MMORPGs but the idea of it having to communicate with a character data server and also the instance which is hosted in another server makes total sense. So I'm guessing they would need to have everything here in the SA server if they wanted to do that, but this would reduce the shared-servers population by removing the SA players, and the SA server would be low population due to not having that many players in here, right. It's a tough call for sure. But it's still awful to play with 200+ms. I'd rather play on an empty server and have long instance queues TBH. I'd wait 30 minutes to play a dungeon or fraktal as long as I don't play with 200ms, but maybe not everyone prefers that. And also WvW would probably not have enough people at all, which is also a key feature from this game. So I understand this better now. Thanks again!

I assume you never played a fast-paced game with 200ms+ before, right? Because a lot of the assumptions you are making makes it look like that. I don't ever think that the transition between servers would be a bigger problem than playing every aspect of the game with 200ms, and I think that if you played with that ping you'd share the same thought. I would happily wait 10 seconds for every instance change if that means I can play instanced content with 30ms instead of 200ms, and I'm pretty sure everyone would agree to that, do you not? When you play games like MOBAs, you share the same login server across the world, but the instanced game is actually hosted in the location the user is trying to find that match. And again, I understand this might not be possible for WvW or open-world, but it's a reality for almost every other game when it comes to instanced content, like a MOBA/RTS/FPS match or a dungeon/raid, etc.

I never played FF14 and I'm not sure they have servers/content hosted in SA. Maybe they just have a server here but it's actually hosted in NA? If the players don't get the latency improvement, then I imagine they'll choose the higher population server, as there is not much reason to stay in a SA server if the server is actually hosted in NA, maybe only for the language in the world chat.

It's not something to search and be done. It's something that needs to be said time and time again so that it gets implemented into the game. That's why I posted it.

So you're only talking about is WvW and open-world. And I agree that this those are the ONLY things that need to be hosted in NA for cross-realm play, WvW and open-world. But why couldn't structured PVP, raids, fractals, strikes and other instanced content be hosted in a SA server if the majority of the players are from a SA world? You don't think there are ~10 players to play those activities in SA? I bet there are thousands, probably more than a million within the 17million players that play this game. I didn't mean they need to host every single aspect of the game here, only the content that is possible and that requires low latency. Sure WvW requires low latency but I don't see how they could host those in here. The way I see it is that they keep every WvW and open-world instances in the US servers but let the players decide which servers they want for instanced play.

Can you give me some examples of big games that don't have servers in South America? Every other big MMORPG I know have servers here. This is also true for RTS/MOBA/FPS and any other genres I can think of. To be honest I don't even recall the last time I found out a game didn't have SA servers, other than GW2. That's my point, every other company does this as this simply means more profit. If this wasn't profitable, then other companies wouldn't do it. The argument of "It's not profitable" is just outmatched by simply the reality of things and every example out there. About game modes depending on a specific amount of players I ask of you: How many South American players you think are playing the game right now? Around 15% of the population? 10% maybe? Isn't that enough to fill a single world?

I know this has probably been asked a thousand times, but, as the game is now listed on Steam, it's getting a lot of attention, also with the new expansion. I don't think there's a better time to bring some servers to SA. I don't have the numbers, but I imagine SA is only behind NA and EU in number of players. I know this is not related to GW2 worlds themselves, but rather to server renting. Guild Wars 2 is one of the top MMORPGs out there, and correct me if I'm mistaken, but every other big MMORPG out there have SA servers, because it's simply more profitable to have them than to not. I know at least a dozen friends that never played GW2 or quit the game in the first week because they don't like playing a fast-paced game (PVP especially) with 180+ms, and they would rather play other games that have SA servers, now that's just my circle, imagine how many thousands players never played GW2 or are not playing today because the game doesn't have servers here. I'm a developer myself and I know the costs of having servers hosted in other places of the world, but this is not a SA game going to NA or EU, it's the other way around. Servers hosted in SA should not be expansive for the company, and I'm pretty confident that the increase in players and those players buying in-game shop itens would be easily more than enough to cover those expanses and make profit, if that wasn't the case, then why do every other company have servers here? I really don't see the advantage in not having them, it feels like a bad company decision if they aim on profit like every other company will. Another point, is that we are in 2022, almost 2023. I know server costing was a lot higher back then, I myself know this because I parcitipated on many server renting decisions while in my field for the companies I worked for, those are not game developing companies, even tho I worked as a game developer for a few years, but still they shouldn't be too different. I've asked this in the support section and they told me to ask this here, as more people asking this means more chance of this happening sooner than later. And again, I know this had been asked a thousand times before, but I don't see why it's not happening yet.