Soaring Spirit.9170

Honestly I wouldn't mind that, dual shield is not exactly common these days (at least in my exp) and dual scepter is already in the lore 😛 But yeah tis a very valid point

Honestly as one of the people who just wants underwater combat to get some love, I have a feeling we will see the trident and spear make it out of the water before we see new weapons. It’s been a very long time since they teased that the Battle Axe the Warrior concept art holds might eventually materialise, I will admit I’m doubtful. Edit: btw if they do ever add claws, Charr best get the ability to just use their own claws, same for Tengu and their talons if we by some chance happen to get a new race.

I've been thinking about this for some time, am really glad to hear its interacting well with Proton. For the longest time I did ponder if they would consider Guild Wars 1 on Mobile Devices, but the Steam Deck is an amazing opportunity for Guild Wars 2 alongside the Steam release. The addition of support for things like controllers for example will probably make an insane impact, I have friends who despite having moved to PC gaming over 6 years ago still struggle with Mouse and Keyboard compared to controller. Assuming Arenanet would also be willing to support things such as a Mount Wheel for summoning your mount, I think it could be amazing for the game. The fact the Steam Deck is also touch screen will also help with certain issues I imagine ^^

While I really don't like Human Braham, I do have to admit the sheer amount of irritation he causes just says to me they did a good job of making him unliked xD I just wish we didn't back off so much 😄

I'm totally up for it, really feel like the Underwater combat needs to be doubled down on sometimes ^^ its so good and just needs a bit more love, not to mention they don't have to be 100% Underwater Combat. I am very sure that when we got some krait lore it was pointed out that they keep air pockets in their homelands for those they capture to keep them alive

Well I'll start off with the obvious I very much welcome the implementation of build templates, functionally it seems like you have done an amazing job. However, I do need to point out the following things I'd suggest changing the following. Consider adding a load from file option, I intend to save my builds the GW1 way it would be nice to be able to just load them the same way too, admitting this will probably not help in terms of sales when it comes to build template slots, which I partially understand. (While also thinking it’s silly to begin with) Consider increasing the number of slots per character by 1 on both Build and Equipment Templates, the short reason being that 2 equipment and 3 build isn’t really enough for anyone. If they actually plan on using the system beyond 1 for PvE and 1 for WVW. If I’m a dedicated player with at least 1 of each profession, where would I put my experiment build, or say I’m pure in a game type, typically there are also 3 builds there, Power, Condition, Support for example. Which may require 3 equipment setups, in short setups come in 3’s.As it stands a Character slot is 800 Gems and comes with 2 Gear Template Slots come to 1000 Gems so in one scenario, I’m better making a dedicated WvW Character and a Dedicated PvE character. This is also arguably true if I make characters dedicated to game modes and you increase the build and equipment slots by one each, on a per character basis, I say this because I'm more likely to consider paying for a 4th Gear slot over a 3rd one if only because it means that character has its 3 Mode/Role slots but can also dabble in other things without the extra requirements that come from actually setting up a 2nd character. At minimum I think this is food for thought Beyond these 2 criticisms I have I am actually very pleased with what I've seen of them so far.

Hold on ... what makes you think that even if this feature was released in 2012, you wouldn't be charged for it? What you are saying doesn't make sense. the timing has NOTHING to do on whether Anet is going to monetize a feature or not. Nothing is 'milking' anyone. That's how sour people talk when they have to pay for something they want ... when they think they should be entitled enough to get it for nothing. There is absolutely NOTHING unreasonable going on here. It's an extra, QoL feature. The OP has it right ... everyone SHOULD be thankful you get access to some off a useful feature without having to pay for it. As far I'm concerned I'd be less upset (I'd have still been upset) if was charged for back in 2012, the hardest content PvE wise was dungons, which were great (and still are albeit neglected and bizarely not being utilised). Why would I have still been upset, well in GW1 I could have as many build templates as I wanted, I was only limited by the amount of txt files I could store on my PC. This doesn't make much sense ... you would be upset if you were charged for templates in GW2 because in GW1 you got unlimited ones for free? How is GW1 related to what happens in GW2? It's not, like even remotely. It's in fact, completely irrelevant. Two different games, two completely different business models. The ONLY thing that ties those games together is the lore ... and that ain't no good reason to think Anet shouldn't charge players for useful features and items. I'd have been upset because of that yeah, I'd however have been much less upset because it didn't really matter that much to me back then either xD also its a Sequel and they used similar business models. In GW we also got Heroes, we do not have them in GW2. Am I mad? No. Do I expect them? No. Do I want them. Oh, yes! ha ha And if they ever did introduce them - it would either be in an expansion, or gem store add-on. I would not expect it for free. Same with builds. They are giving us some for free, and more are available if you want them. Thank you Arenanet for the hard work you do, and for 7 years of no monthly fees! :) The Heroes system isn't a very good example for comparison in my opinion, but yeah I already kinda said I was disappointed they were not a thing but don't put words in my mouth. I would purely have been disappointed to a much lesser degree. They were not really needed at launch so them not being there wasn't a big deal, it was literally this. "Oh no builds feature. disappointment. Oh well." As for this, my only issue with monitisation is in "Build" templates, when it comes to "Gear" templates I'm certainly on board, its clearly a lot of effort and my only gripe is that 2 Gear Templates by default is simply not enough, just by popping it up to 3 at least allow for "Generic PvE, Generic WvW and some specialised build". Beyond that I'm fine with monetisation of it. The actual systems really cool its had a lot of thought put into it.

So yeah, I'm one of those pesky GW1 players who is going to point at GW1 and go this was free. ^^ However given I selected Other in the Poll I'm going to expand on why I chose it. I'll split this into 2 halves. Build Templates then Gear Templates. To be blunt the "Build Templates" which uses traits, they should be Free and Unlimited in my opinion. All I see looking at its current implementation is a cloud service that’s charging me to store roughly 30 byte string files. Which also won't let me load file via the game, i.e. the GW1 Method. Instead I must open a file copy the string and paste it. Now I'm not stupid, implementing this into the game obviously wasn't straight forward and took effort, however given the nature of builds I can't really see why you would charge for this specific feature. Maybe if you compromise and let things like Arc automate the copy paste from file aspect of it I won’t be so bothered, however I highly doubt this will happen either. Now “Gear Templates” I can certainly see why you would monetize this and I certainly have no real issue with that, HOWEVER per character we have 2 slots, not per game type, 2 slots altogether, for both PvE and WvW (I won’t touch sPvP because that’s different).Now let’s just talk about PvE, more specifically let’s pick 1 aspect of PvE that’s going to probably utilise this the most that being Raids (I am aware EVERY mode will be able to utilise this but its easier to present my example using Raids).When entering a Raid there are usually 3 Roles a player will take, Offence, Defence or Support. Each of which can be broken down into more builds Offence into Power and Condition Damage for example, Support into Healing / Boons / Buffs. This is already pushing us over the 2 default slots we get.What’s more it’s also preventing us from having more than 1 set-up dedicated to 1 aspect of the game. I can’t have an open world setup, a raid setup and a WvW setup, without buying extra character specific slots. I am limited to either, a PvE setup and a WvW setup, or 2 setups dedicated to just 1 game mode.There is the reasonable argument of well just make an alt for each game mode, to an extent I agree with this, however just by giving players access to 3 Gear templates you eliminate most of the issue, especially when you consider some players will have at least 1 of every profession and will use some of them only in specific game modes. I feel in this case 3 really is the magic number, on mode specific characters it lets you cover the 3 basic roles they might face, even if we go WvW specific and go say; Zerg, Roaming, Scout. On Jack of all trade characters it can be “Generic, Instanced and WvW”. It’s a better midground than 2 which is very quickly going to pressure a player towards the Gem Store on a per character basis potentially.My suggestion therefore would be to give us 3 Gear Slots per character by default if we are not on a Free To Play account, even going so far as to say that it might even be worth considering making it 4, that however would need more weighing up in relation to the value of a character slot itself.Hopefully my argument sounds pretty reasonable, it’s a lot to read after all xD.

Its an expectation based on whats already been presented, for me personally I was disappointed initially it wasn't there at all. I obviously expected changes, we were moving from a CORPG to an MMORPG and there was a lot fo talk of changes, including simplifying the way builds worked. Thats why as I say I was less bothered about it overall. Heck even when I wrote that massive response to you I realised what aspects of it being a paid thing, I accept. My main issue in it being paid, is that from what I know of the system its below what I would consider reasonable before asking for Gems. I can see easily why you would do this with gear, I just think its should be at least 3 arguably 4 before the Gem store comes into play. As for traits and utilities, I think its silly to charge for it at all. Again though thats my opinion.

Hold on ... what makes you think that even if this feature was released in 2012, you wouldn't be charged for it? What you are saying doesn't make sense. the timing has NOTHING to do on whether Anet is going to monetize a feature or not. Nothing is 'milking' anyone. That's how sour people talk when they have to pay for something they want ... when they think they should be entitled enough to get it for nothing. There is absolutely NOTHING unreasonable going on here. It's an extra, QoL feature. The OP has it right ... everyone SHOULD be thankful you get access to some off a useful feature without having to pay for it. As far I'm concerned I'd be less upset (I'd have still been upset) if was charged for back in 2012, the hardest content PvE wise was dungons, which were great (and still are albeit neglected and bizarely not being utilised). Why would I have still been upset, well in GW1 I could have as many build templates as I wanted, I was only limited by the amount of txt files I could store on my PC. This doesn't make much sense ... you would be upset if you were charged for templates in GW2 because in GW1 you got unlimited ones for free? How is GW1 related to what happens in GW2? It's not, like even remotely. It's in fact, completely irrelevant. Two different games, two completely different business models. The ONLY thing that ties those games together is the lore ... and that ain't no good reason to think Anet shouldn't charge players for useful features and items. I'd have been upset because of that yeah, I'd however have been much less upset because it didn't really matter that much to me back then either xD also its a Sequel and they used very similar business models. No, they don't have similar business models. If you think they do, you just don't know what that means. They have certainly diverged much more now, I agree. Perhaps to me its more of a perception thing, GW1 after all had a limited cosmetics store back then and was mostly using its older store for buying account upgrades to give a feel for what the Gem store would become.

Hold on ... what makes you think that even if this feature was released in 2012, you wouldn't be charged for it? What you are saying doesn't make sense. the timing has NOTHING to do on whether Anet is going to monetize a feature or not. Nothing is 'milking' anyone. That's how sour people talk when they have to pay for something they want ... when they think they should be entitled enough to get it for nothing. There is absolutely NOTHING unreasonable going on here. It's an extra, QoL feature. The OP has it right ... everyone SHOULD be thankful you get access to some off a useful feature without having to pay for it. As far I'm concerned I'd be less upset (I'd have still been upset) if was charged for back in 2012, the hardest content PvE wise was dungons, which were great (and still are albeit neglected and bizarely not being utilised). Why would I have still been upset, well in GW1 I could have as many build templates as I wanted, I was only limited by the amount of txt files I could store on my PC. This doesn't make much sense ... you would be upset if you were charged for templates in GW2 because in GW1 you got unlimited ones for free? How is GW1 related to what happens in GW2? It's not, like even remotely. It's in fact, completely irrelevant. Two different games, two completely different business models. The ONLY thing that ties those games together is the lore ... and that ain't no good reason to think Anet shouldn't charge players for useful features and items. I'd have been upset because of that yeah, I'd however have been much less upset because it didn't really matter that much to me back then either xD also its a Sequel and they used similar business models.

Hold on ... what makes you think that even if this feature was released in 2012, you wouldn't be charged for it? What you are saying doesn't make sense. the timing has NOTHING to do on whether Anet is going to monetize a feature or not. Nothing is 'milking' anyone. That's how sour people talk when they have to pay for something they want ... when they think they should be entitled enough to get it for nothing. There is absolutely NOTHING unreasonable going on here. It's an extra, QoL feature. The OP has it right ... everyone SHOULD be thankful you get access to some off a useful feature without having to pay for it. As far I'm concerned I'd be less upset (I'd have still been upset) if was charged for back in 2012, the hardest content PvE wise was dungons, which were great (and still are albeit neglected and bizarely not being utilised). Why would I have still been upset, well in GW1 I could have as many build templates as I wanted, I was only limited by the amount of txt files I could store on my PC.What was in these txt files? A small string. Equally the big advertisment and justification of the Gem Store at the time, was that it would largely be cosmetic with some bonus' in it, that didn't really affect gameplay much. Now I won't go into bags and storage beyond cutting it short, inventory management in GW1 was quite messy and we kinda accepted the concept of paying for bank tabs (IIRC), not to mention for some, build templates are a much larger quality of life feature. Builds mattered a lot less back then in terms of whats expected and rigidity, and as far as I'm aware thats still true for most the game, you only really see specialised builds PvE wise in Raids and Fractals. Yeah, its wanted in WvW and sPvP too but I'm going to use PvE as my example.Now just by common sense, people using specialised builds are going to want a builds system, and are also going to probably be dedicated players, so odds are given the style of progression GW2 follows, they will have more than 1 profession they play. They will likely also want to cover as many roles as they can, on what professions they do play. So even assuming you limit how many builds a person can have preset, you would look at whats commonly done or used and should arrive at the conclusion that you want everyone to be able to store an offensive setup, a defensive setup and a supportive setup. Which already goes over the 2 people get by default, before we even split Offence into Power and Condition based builds or consider they might have a Generic one for open world. So per character we are falling down on what we expect we would need. Now if a player doesn'tdo this, woohoo they have 3 Gear slots (I'd argue 4 if you think how I do but still). Any extra I could go OK maybe given they are not highly likely to be wanted, there is an argument for them being "extra's" and slapping a gem cost on them. especially since they need to be stored somewhere server side if your going to take them out of the inventory (which I believe was where GW1 would pull from for its weapons templates) However the big one is traits and utilities, these don't really have any justification (In my opinion), you don't store traits anywhere nor utilities, the only real thing thats being stored is a unique key that dictates the ones chosen, at least I'd assume this and again this probably wouldn't take up much space individually and if its a bulk storage issue they could probably get away with storing it the same way as GW1. So yeah I think people are entitled to be unhappy and want to express displeasure, your certainly in correct to wish to counter argue on points, just like I am, though so far I've mostly given opinions based on my views. What I will however directly say is to say "timing has NOTHING to do on whether Anet is going to monetize a feature or not" is ridiculous,. This is a business scenario. Timing ALWAYS matters on things, especially in business. You yourself asked if it would have mattered in 2012, as shown above I think it would have, to a differing degree in relation to how it matters now. Guild Wars 2 is 7 years old. Thats a good amount of time and opinions change, mine has its gone more towards disappointment in relation to this topic as I view it as a more clear sign that some things have changed negatively. Maybe thats because I've been around longer and remember it was free in GW1, maybe its because this is happening to people who have invested into the game monetarily as well or maybe its something else. Maybe if I started playing at a point afterwards and had only found out they were even a thing in GW1 I'd feel less disappointed, maybe if I hadn't heard of them existing at all I'd be really happy. Its going to change to each individual on many different variables. Timing is certainly one of those things thats going to matter, we have been promised expansion quality content as part of the season. Some of that is VERY likely to be monetised, the order and timing of its introduction is certainly going to matter, on top of which aspects of it are monetised. Anyway I really went of on one there ^^, hopefully though some will garner something useful from it if they can be bothered to read all of it.

Well it simplifies things being built in to the game. I know some people don’t like change but sometimes change is necessary for evolution. Charging money for what was free in the previous game (and was free here with an add on) is some bizarre evolution to be sureHehe well yeah because its not "evolution". Well not evolution in the good way anyway. (I'm just feeling a need say this I know its not needed, but its fun to play the role of misinterpretation) Regardless from my understanding I can literally copy my GW1 folder structure, slap a 2 on the end, split it by Gear and Builds, then manually move the codes into the game and use it in the same way without much hassle. Which is what this one will do if this assumption is correct. As time has gone on I have expected builds would be monetised more increasingly if they ever came after I found out it wasn't a thing at launch. While I agree the game does need to make money, sometimes I really feel like I'm being encouraged to leave the game by the people I should expect it from the least. Which makes it all the more disappointing. P.S. Amusing how its only 2 for Gear, 1 for Power, 1 for Condi and 1 for Support gear would have made more sense as a minimum amount, thats before you get into more specialised set-ups.

Well I'm obviously too late asking but I wondered if " FoS & Friends: Bloodbound " influenced any of it? - For those interested