Orthonen.9470

All I see is a streamer go in headstrong into a 3v2 and lose the fight on purpose.

Well you don't exactly win with a good build the problem is the strategy. I've recently began to figure out how to win. And on the balance thing, I feel you're right that nerfs don't really do much.

That's because you don't actually think like a game designer you only think about what brings in the most money. What I said has nothing to do with the difference between how a game designer things vs. someone that wants to make money. In your last statement obviously not in your posts definitely proved otherwise. Your opinions are hands down from someone who would love to make profiteering a maximum as possible. You don't care about quality you only care about quantity. That doesn't change the truth of what I said. What you believe me to care about is irrelevant to the discussion. The only reason you would deflect to guessing what I care about is because the substance of what you are saying is weak to begin with and you can't warp your head around the things I'm telling you. I suggest you get back on track with things that are relevant to your thread. Did you literally just paint my generalization of your statements as an attack? No ... in fact, it's an attempt to keep you on track with the topic of your own thread. I don't care what you think about me and it has no relevance to what we are talking about here. If you didn't care you wouldn't respond. The same goes vice versa. Just make sure you keep yourself on track too. This thread was never about money or profits or whatever you brought into the conversation to begin with. And while you brought it up I simply decided to take it upon myself to point out the flaw in all of your arguments against the others trying to prove your correct but irrelevant input as being anything but useful to solving any of the problems people have. I didn't say I didn't care and nothing should have given you the indication to comment as such either. And to be clear, I'm more on track than you care to acknowledge. Analytics are important, they should be used, they don't kill 'fun' and are necessary to ensure the game can continue to provide that fun. There isn't a 'flaw' in that argument anywhere. Companies don't improve what they don't measure. If you think otherwise, your understanding about the importance of taking measures and analysis of those measures for a business is severely lacking to the point where you should probably educate yourself before continuing with the claim analytics shouldn't be used. There is a flaw and I'm saying the flaw is you don't need analytics in order to make the game or any game more fun. At all. We're human beings capable of imagination and can certainly tell what's fun to do and what's not without relying on some graph. Your logic certainly applies to general products and businesses, but we're talking about games. You know, like basketball, chess, tag, blackjack. Considering what is 'fun' is subjective, there isn't any evidence to that claim. And that kind of comment is why you should never be allowed to be the dungeon master in dungeons and dragons. No problem ... my aspirations in life are a little higher than geeking out to D&D. it didn't take you long to go back to talking about me instead of addressing my points did it?Considering you've talked about me A LOT your comment is an overreaction. Learn to take a chill pill after you realize that you're not actually an artistic human being.

That's because you don't actually think like a game designer you only think about what brings in the most money. What I said has nothing to do with the difference between how a game designer things vs. someone that wants to make money. In your last statement obviously not in your posts definitely proved otherwise. Your opinions are hands down from someone who would love to make profiteering a maximum as possible. You don't care about quality you only care about quantity. That doesn't change the truth of what I said. What you believe me to care about is irrelevant to the discussion. The only reason you would deflect to guessing what I care about is because the substance of what you are saying is weak to begin with and you can't warp your head around the things I'm telling you. I suggest you get back on track with things that are relevant to your thread. Did you literally just paint my generalization of your statements as an attack? No ... in fact, it's an attempt to keep you on track with the topic of your own thread. I don't care what you think about me and it has no relevance to what we are talking about here. If you didn't care you wouldn't respond. The same goes vice versa. Just make sure you keep yourself on track too. This thread was never about money or profits or whatever you brought into the conversation to begin with. And while you brought it up I simply decided to take it upon myself to point out the flaw in all of your arguments against the others trying to prove your correct but irrelevant input as being anything but useful to solving any of the problems people have. I didn't say I didn't care and nothing should have given you the indication to comment as such either. And to be clear, I'm more on track than you care to acknowledge. Analytics are important, they should be used, they don't kill 'fun' and are necessary to ensure the game can continue to provide that fun. There isn't a 'flaw' in that argument anywhere. Companies don't improve what they don't measure. If you think otherwise, your understanding about the importance of taking measures and analysis of those measures for a business is severely lacking to the point where you should probably educate yourself before continuing with the claim analytics shouldn't be used. There is a flaw and I'm saying the flaw is you don't need analytics in order to make the game or any game more fun. At all. We're human beings capable of imagination and can certainly tell what's fun to do and what's not without relying on some graph. Your logic certainly applies to general products and businesses, but we're talking about games. You know, like basketball, chess, tag, blackjack. Considering what is 'fun' is subjective, there isn't any evidence to that claim. And that kind of comment is why you should never be allowed to be the dungeon master in dungeons and dragons.

That's because you don't actually think like a game designer you only think about what brings in the most money. What I said has nothing to do with the difference between how a game designer things vs. someone that wants to make money. In your last statement obviously not in your posts definitely proved otherwise. Your opinions are hands down from someone who would love to make profiteering a maximum as possible. You don't care about quality you only care about quantity. That doesn't change the truth of what I said. What you believe me to care about is irrelevant to the discussion. The only reason you would deflect to guessing what I care about is because the substance of what you are saying is weak to begin with and you can't warp your head around the things I'm telling you. I suggest you get back on track with things that are relevant to your thread. Did you literally just paint my generalization of your statements as an attack? No ... in fact, it's an attempt to keep you on track with the topic of your own thread. I don't care what you think about me and it has no relevance to what we are talking about here. If you didn't care you wouldn't respond. The same goes vice versa. Just make sure you keep yourself on track too. This thread was never about money or profits or whatever you brought into the conversation to begin with. And while you brought it up I simply decided to take it upon myself to point out the flaw in all of your arguments against the others trying to prove your correct but irrelevant input as being anything but useful to solving any of the problems people have. I didn't say I didn't care and nothing should have given you the indication to comment as such either. And to be clear, I'm more on track than you care to acknowledge. Analytics are important, they should be used, they don't kill 'fun' and are necessary to ensure the game can continue to provide that fun. There isn't a 'flaw' in that argument anywhere. Companies don't improve what they don't measure. If you think otherwise, your understanding about the importance of taking measures and analysis of those measures for a business is severely lacking to the point where you should probably educate yourself before continuing with the claim analytics shouldn't be used. There is a flaw and I'm saying the flaw is you don't need analytics in order to make the game or any game more fun. At all. We're human beings capable of imagination and can certainly tell what's fun to do and what's not without relying on some graph. Your logic certainly applies to general products and businesses, but we're talking about games. You know, like basketball, chess, tag, blackjack. If a designer for anything took your approach at making a game you're not making it the people you're selling it to are.

That's because you don't actually think like a game designer you only think about what brings in the most money. What I said has nothing to do with the difference between how a game designer things vs. someone that wants to make money. In your last statement obviously not in your posts definitely proved otherwise. Your opinions are hands down from someone who would love to make profiteering a maximum as possible. You don't care about quality you only care about quantity. That doesn't change the truth of what I said. What you believe me to care about is irrelevant to the discussion. The only reason you would deflect to guessing what I care about is because the substance of what you are saying is weak to begin with and you can't warp your head around the things I'm telling you. I suggest you get back on track with things that are relevant to your thread. Did you literally just paint my generalization of your statements as an attack? No ... in fact, it's an attempt to keep you on track with the topic of your own thread. I don't care what you think about me and it has no relevance to what we are talking about here. If you didn't care you wouldn't respond. The same goes vice versa. Just make sure you keep yourself on track too. This thread was never about money or profits or whatever you brought into the conversation to begin with. And while you brought it up I simply decided to take it upon myself to point out the flaw in all of your arguments against the others trying to prove your correct but irrelevant input as being anything but useful to solving any of the problems people have.

That's because you don't actually think like a game designer you only think about what brings in the most money. What I said has nothing to do with the difference between how a game designer things vs. someone that wants to make money. In your last statement obviously not in your posts definitely proved otherwise. Your opinions are hands down from someone who would love to make profiteering a maximum as possible. You don't care about quality you only care about quantity. That doesn't change the truth of what I said. What you believe me to care about is irrelevant to the discussion. The only reason you would deflect to guessing what I care about is because the substance of what you are saying is weak to begin with and you can't warp your head around the things I'm telling you. I suggest you get back on track with things that are relevant to your thread. Did you literally just paint my generalization of your statements as an attack? Go and read the things you've written and tell me they're not aimed with the basis of making ANET more money. You are literally the ANTI-Fun police if it doesn't make ANET money you literally shrug any idea as a bad one. And when people call you out on it you resort to painting their statements as an insult to you.

That's because you don't actually think like a game designer you only think about what brings in the most money. What I said has nothing to do with the difference between how a game designer things vs. someone that wants to make money. In your last statement obviously not in your posts definitely proved otherwise. Your opinions are hands down from someone who would love to make profiteering a maximum as possible. You don't care about quality you only care about quantity.

That's because you don't actually think like a game designer you only think about what brings in the most money. There isn't a problem to begin with, not with raiding not with money, not with content, all I said was that I thought strikes being implemented due to analytics is a bad idea, and people lost their minds. Everyone acts like there's a problem when there isn't people are just forming them out of thin air. But that's the kind of people ANET attracts with this game.

If that were the case then why are people in the Aerodome saying its too easy.Massive discrepancies between skill tiers are very much a thing in GW2. The same content can be prohibitively difficult for one, but laughably easy to another. In fact, that's one of the main problems that both balance and design teams have to face, and one of the core issues of this game. If the majority of raiders were simply failing to kill bosses ANET would clearly nerf raids (which is why Candy Crush scenario can't apply to guild wars).The majority of raiders are, by definition, the people that did not fail to kill bosses. Notice, though, that they are not a majority of players that did attemtp raids. Notice also, that the raid population is so small that Anet does not think putting more resources into them is justifiable. But as it turns out the raiders sitting AFK on the Aerodome do get past this barrier you can't get past.Why do you mistakenly think (again) that i did not get past that barrier? I just straight out told you that your assumption was wrong, didn't I. You ever just thought you're not actually good at the game? Or maybe your group is not good at the game?No, why would i?There being actual mass of people waiting in the aerodomeYou mean, like 50 (the Aerodrome instance cap)? That mass of people? and a lot of people actually having legendary armor means your significant number that went beyond "just trying" is actually insignificant.I do have envoy armor as well. Glad you think that makes me significant. So, you were saying? I don't believe you actually have the envoy armor. Honestly it wouldn't matter if they didn't. but it's really bad sport to assume someone is lying when you have no proof. He's/she's "tried" raiding and claimed to ragequit them for being too hard and somehow magically completed the collection that takes weeks to get. Wings 1,2, and 3, gimme a break, if he had actually beaten them he/she wouldn't be saying or claiming any of the points he/she stands by. Honestly I don't even care anymore about the game in general. After getting 74 insights and 12 divinations I'm actually getting bored of raids, and subsequently the game itself again. The dopamine just isn't the same. Also it's ANETs game if they do implement an easy mode and they feel that's their solution I'll be disappointed but that's all. I also don't expect much out of people who say it's difficult. Just look at the latest story, you even have people leaving public 10 man's on the last boss and dying to it when he's super easy if you just follow the instructions on the screen. I actually had to 5 man it because people just left, pugs couldn't follow simple instructions and they kept dying on the preevent. ANET catered to this community of "dust bunnies who have never experienced mind blowing war" and now it's backfiring.

If that were the case then why are people in the Aerodome saying its too easy.Massive discrepancies between skill tiers are very much a thing in GW2. The same content can be prohibitively difficult for one, but laughably easy to another. In fact, that's one of the main problems that both balance and design teams have to face, and one of the core issues of this game. If the majority of raiders were simply failing to kill bosses ANET would clearly nerf raids (which is why Candy Crush scenario can't apply to guild wars).The majority of raiders are, by definition, the people that did not fail to kill bosses. Notice, though, that they are not a majority of players that did attemtp raids. Notice also, that the raid population is so small that Anet does not think putting more resources into them is justifiable. But as it turns out the raiders sitting AFK on the Aerodome do get past this barrier you can't get past.Why do you mistakenly think (again) that i did not get past that barrier? I just straight out told you that your assumption was wrong, didn't I. You ever just thought you're not actually good at the game? Or maybe your group is not good at the game?No, why would i?There being actual mass of people waiting in the aerodomeYou mean, like 50 (the Aerodrome instance cap)? That mass of people? and a lot of people actually having legendary armor means your significant number that went beyond "just trying" is actually insignificant.I do have envoy armor as well. Glad you think that makes me significant. So, you were saying?I don't believe you actually have the envoy armor.

Right, because not all players want to raid to begin with, it's not for everyone. Also people in the Aerodome are raiders. You can ask them for yourself individually (I can tell you because that's something I did personally). You asked every person in a given aerodrome instance individually? wow that's some serious dedication!I get bored while waiting.

The reason for the time you spend farming for something is what gives it its value. If you're simply farming to get a silly skin and all you've been doing in game is ez mode content to get it, you rob yourself of any excitement. It's like you're just robbing a bank and there's no security guard there, all you do is walk in press a button the money dispenses itself in amounts of 2 dollars at a time and walk out with the money in hand. Then because you do it everyone else does too. Ever heard of that video game called let's count sand? I got the 1,000,000,000th grain achievement in that game. Fishing in wow is more exciting than farming silverwastes. Fishing in real life is more exciting than farming silverwastes. Making a beat on a desk with my hands is more exciting than farming silverwastes. The graveyard, a steam game, is more exciting and filled with heart thumping action than silverwastes farming. Okay maybe not, but the train simulator is 10x more exciting than silverwastes farming.

playing with likeminded people would be the solution if there were an easy mode. but there isn't. difficulty invites toxicity. and there are a lot of players who think like me, I'm not the only one. there have been countless threads asking for easy mode raids because they want to experience the content too AND not have to deal with toxic raiders. Public strikes exist. They are lore heavy. Nobody does them.

like i said, arenanet can fix the toxicity issues by making an easy mode. the sheer difficulty of the raids invites elitist toxicity because it's no longer about playing how you want, it becomes necessary to fulfill requirements and that by it's very nature invites toxicity. Sure they could ... we could dream up ALL sorts of ideas of how Anet could fix it ... BUT That doesn't change what I said ... EVEN with an easy mode, you STILL need to respect other people's ideas about how they want to play the game if you want that respect back for how you want to play the game. ... and if you think an easy mode will rid you of people who want to play optimally ... you just haven't given it much thought. What makes you think easy mode will make people decide they dont' want fast clears? That doesn't make sense. Fast clears only mean you're not doing things for fun. No, it doesn't. Don't even begin you know what some people do for fun. Plus, that has nothing to do with the fact that people will still want fast clears in easy mode raids if they existed which is what we were talking about. The only reason I see people wanting fast clears = loot.

It's like people on this thread are trying to correct the OP for an opinion. Ouch.

like i said, arenanet can fix the toxicity issues by making an easy mode. the sheer difficulty of the raids invites elitist toxicity because it's no longer about playing how you want, it becomes necessary to fulfill requirements and that by it's very nature invites toxicity. Sure they could ... we could dream up ALL sorts of ideas of how Anet could fix it ... BUT That doesn't change what I said ... EVEN with an easy mode, you STILL need to respect other people's ideas about how they want to play the game if you want that respect back for how you want to play the game. ... and if you think an easy mode will rid you of people who want to play optimally ... you just haven't given it much thought. What makes you think easy mode will make people decide they dont' want fast clears? That doesn't make sense. Fast clears only mean you're not doing things for fun.

I agree, and that's why I'm playing Skyrim on expert mode. I never even touched it prior to making this post and I have been playing it for hours now. I love this game! My original post as a whole wasn't about raiding either way.

That's Candy Crush, a mobile game in which you swipe on your phone screen with one thumb. We're playing a game with much much more complexity in mechanics, scenery, and overall design than some mobile board game on a timer. Also the approach taken by Candy Crush does not answer raiding in gw2 because people who are arguing that raiding is too hard have never actually tried raiding. Whereas in candy crush people actually did encounter level 65. Hence why they nerfed level 65 in candy crush but they haven't nerfed raids in gw2. This is what it means to think like a game designer. It's a very in-depth mentality as to why you want to take an approach. I am into game dev so I know what I am talking about. ;) If we're strictly speaking about analytics here, the statistics have to answer "has said player done raids, if never, why?" An experienced producer has to answer questions like these. And that's where the strikes popped up from. From a standpoint here strictly speaking out of experience, the level designers of raids have taken a very careful approach to not make them difficult. In fact I can 100% guarantee that if we're taking an experienced player that can dodge roll out of orange circles and can learn how to do the mechanics; with the right amount of healing and group composition raids are on the medium scale. If anything, t3 Fractals are actually a lot harder than raids as a whole, as hard as it is to believe, I actually have a lot more trouble doing fractals than I do raiding. While you assume I'm seeking some sort of answer, I'm not, and neither are the people who have actually raided, because as raiders who actually have experienced the raids and beaten them we don't even have questions to begin with. I'm just enjoying the fruits of critical thinking and analysis. I'm actually not here to get scolded for my point of view either, so I retaliate when an attack feels insidiously motivated.

I hate pvp/wvw but do it for the AP. I dont enjoy my time there at all. Saddly, i need that 4k+ AP thats locked behind competitive modes. I had a similar mindset in terms of WvW. I never cared at all about winning the tower-defense thing. All I wanted was to go to big brawls against other masses of players. I hated having nights without seeing enemies which is the main reason I don't WvW anymore.

Tbh the only way i could see that kind of data being gathered is through surveys(which they do send out sometimes.) Me having(for example) a few PVP and Raid achievements doesnt mean i enjoy those modes. Me having almost all the achievements in the story doesnt mean anything either. So if they are just using that data....oof...but i doubt thats all they use. I know, and I said so multiple times already. But there are so many gurus on these forums that claim to know so much about analytics that disagree with that. And when asked to provide which type of data can do the same job as a survey/poll or reading social media/forums, they simply vanish. I think what is happening here, is mostly miscommunication, rather than disagreement. If you're reading carefully enough, no one is actually saying enjoyment is measured by analytical data, rather that analytical data backs up whether people are enjoying themselves, or hint at enjoyment. (Edit: Although reading back, I did phrase it terribly at one point, saying analytical data does show enjoyment but not 100%, by which I didn't mean show as in prove , but more show as in hint at or shine a light on.) Of course they do, back in the beta weekend event they posted "Heat maps" that showed where most players were during the beta. Bright colors meant lots of players were at one place, no colors at all meant there were no players in that area. Popularity is very easy to track with proper data, and they do have that kind of data and have shown that they do. It's when it comes to enjoyment and quality that no such data can measure it properly, other than actual community interaction. In fact, enjoyment isn't perfectly measured by social media surveys and the like either. People are incredibly biased and easily influenced. One time they have one favourite, and the other time another. Often enough the newest thing (or one of those newer things). And getting behind the meaning and reading what the community is really saying is a whole job in and of itself. The same way quality and enjoyment also don't always go hand in hand either. A game can be of the highest quality but simply not be enjoying to a person at all. (to talk a bit about WoW, maybe WoW was never that good to begin with, and game metrics have little to do with it. :p) Personally I think the miscommunication has more to do with people interpreting disagreement with someone as a war with them. It's quite easily noticable in most of the raid post for example where a vocal minority polarize the topic. Their also a topic recently about someone getting banned for two weeks and when other people didn't like their idea of being able to pay of the ban he cursed then to hell in some hindu variantThe topic has violently shifted to raids, which is not at all what I wanted to get at; in terms of the war about raiding, the hostility here is coming to people claiming things are too hard when they've never even seen them. In terms of the analytics, you have the die hard robot humanoids attacking the flesh and boned about what's actually fun and what isn't. The question that keeps coming up is "Does analytics actually show what's fun or what isn't or is it simply showing something else?" And my answer is that it's showing something else. My whole post went from something I intended for GD but turned to raids.

I understand what you are saying but reject the distinction you seem to be making between self interest and enjoyment and rewards and enjoyment. Again, why wouldn't someone spending time in a zone they don't "enjoy" (this term is being used by many because it is vague and resists an objective and global description) be taken to mean that they "enjoy" rewards more than "enjoyable" game play? You again missed the point. Yes, if we know that someone does not enjoy the zone/instance/content, and yet spends time there, we can reason out that in that specific case their desire for the rewards coming from that content is greater than their dislike of said content. We would not necessarily know how that person would have reacted in another zone with another set of rewards though.Which is beside the point, by the way. Point being that the "analytics data" tells us that the person is visiting the zone, but it's not necessarily telling us why. And here the distinction becomes very important. The knowledge about why players frequent a certain content is important to developers, because it tells them how to design future stuff. If they make light of that distinction you think is unimportant, it is very likely they might next time concentrate on exactly the wrong parts, delivering the things that were disliked and cutting back on those that were liked. And yes, analytics might give them the data on what went wrong eventually, after they'd have time to compare notes on a lot of zones/instances, but by that time they might have ended up with a lot of failures. Notice also, that if someone is interested in the rewards, but not the zone/instance, then while you might say they are experiencing some level of "enjoyment", that enjoyment is not tied to the zone/instance at all. Move the rewards somewhere else, and that person will move as well.An astute deduction! I understand what you are saying but reject the distinction you seem to be making between self interest and enjoyment and rewards and enjoyment. Again, why wouldn't someone spending time in a zone they don't "enjoy" (this term is being used by many because it is vague and resists an objective and global description) be taken to mean that they "enjoy" rewards more than "enjoyable" game play? Imo, most everyone here, including you, has been somewhat right. However, many refuse to accept their value finding profile as their own and would rather blame the game or analytics for showing that they are compelled by or prioritize rewards. A company that sells into our reptile brain deserves to be put under a microscope (imo, Arenanet agressivelly sells into our reptile brains) but we also need to be willing to inspect and take responsibility for our own reptile brain. Please forgive me if this lands as criticism, I do not intend it as criticism but as a wake up call, but anyone claiming that they need to do something they don't enjoy in this game has given control to their reptile brains. The reptile brain loves rewards and is designed to pump happy chemicals when we get them. This thread started with someone mad at analytics for showing the studio people other than them and has been filled with people mad at analytics for showing the studio themselves.I am not really mad at analytics all I said is that it shouldn't drive the direction of the game. But I agree wholeheartedly with your inference on the "reptilian" brain of doing things you don't enjoy for rewards instead of fun. It's my primary reason for making this post. Its also why I never have and never will repeat farm Bjora Meta or Domain of Istan. I prefer getting gold the harder way, the fun way, the one that has more action than clicking stuff on the mystic forge or mindlessly pressing 1 on a meta event.

Everything except for season 2.

I don't know as a warrior and guardian rangers are notoriously easy to burst down.

There are scenarios when you have to make decisions that have some players leaving, no matter how you decide (or even if you don't decide at all). As hard as it is, sometimes trying to keep a certain player (or group of players) playing the game is more expensive than accepting the loss of said player(s). So cut off all the raiders, cut off all the fractal lovers, cut off all the WvWers, cut off all the PvPers from hoping for new content to make cosmetics which just becomes some skin to a collection? That's a brilliant strategy for a well thought recipe that promotes failure! Anything that stifles development in a mode is effectively bad, for one thing I was disappointed that we didn't get a new open world map and instead got an instance last patch, just for the sake of strikes? Now there's a new element to focus on, so we have strikes, pvp, raids, open world, wvw, and fractals to focus on. WvW already attacked by a rocket launcher so...............