Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Obtena.7952

Members
  • Posts

    12,785
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Obtena.7952

  1. Except you don't need to use a metabattle build to get that. Even most of the out of date builds are still going to deliver more than acceptable DPS ... as long as the people using them know how to play them and the encounter mechanics. So what I said wasn't wrong. Don't pretend like you can't deliver DPS unless you are using THE most up to date DPS builds. Even then, it's unlikely you will get close to the stated DPS values. The primary improvement that needs to happen here isn't Metabattle handing you the most up to date builds that DPS pushers who abuse you with DPS meters approve of. But here is a suggestion. If you have a suggestion to improve metabattle ... talk to the people that manage it. What does this even have to do with GW2 forums?
  2. The changes we have seen in the last few years are definitely not random and most are aligned to what Anet is trying to do. Specs defined by roles (yes, we see that) Specs within their roles are reasonably balanced within those roles so no specific choice is favoured (that sometimes results in unfavourable effects OUTSIDE those specs) IMO, the functions of things are related to theme and focused on PVE. Competitive modes "balanced" (loosely) around changing the numbers of specific elements More attention to 'unbreaking' things (though we can still get some changes that overshoot and need to be addressed later.) This isn't to say there aren't still some weird changes going on that make people think WTF, but as always, the context is important if you want to really understand. Interesting case ... change to Necro Signet trait. Funny part is that if the current version was introduced at launch, no one would have questioned it but NOW, it's blowing peoples minds.
  3. Funny, some people STILL haven't figured out that your team mates rage quitting on you isn't about your build, it's about you knowing how to play and the encounter. But I'm sure someone coming back from a prolonged break has both of these things locked down so the only important factor is the build they use 🤣 Imagine a world where you find things about about how to play a game ... by playing it and not having a website tell you how to play it.
  4. It's completely weird how within a decade, some MMO players want content to be free and when it's not, they label it as P2W to justify their unreasonable expectations. The irony is that MMO's like this are some of the BEST value for money gaming entertainment you can get. Here is the kicker ... any label you want to apply doesn't matter. If the content has value to you, you buy it. If you don't buy it, then you don't have any reason to complain you don't have it or that people that do have it are open to options you don't have, regardless of whether those options make them "win" more than you do. Another common misconception here is the expectation that GW2 is going to drown you with that 'big score' loot prize and make you rich. It's just not that kind of game ... and it's not hard to see it isn't that kind of game before you even hit level 80. If you are pre-occupied with the 'big dirty' and ignore all the other value the game offers, that's not a game problem. It's a 'you' problem.
  5. I think it's important to be accurate with something being talked about here. The Living story content we got between expansions was NEVER free. It was part of the cost of the expansion. Still, there is some truth in the claim this wasn't an ideal situation because people forgot they DID pay for it and needed the expansion to access it. Therefore, I agree it was a mistake for Anet to throttle content this way because it made a bad perception with players who convinced themselves that NOW we pay for all new content, they are getting shafted. The one point I will acknowledge to people complaining about the new model is that the content is more expensive than what the original expansion costs were. Unfortunately, that's just a consequence of how the game has aged as well as it's players and the content/skins they already accumulated. Still, you want the old content, AFAIK, it can be purchased from time to time at prices that are inline with the cost of the new content as well so. It would be a bold move but I'm of the opinion that if Anet wants players (veterans or not) to continue to patronize the GS at levels that could justify more content and features, they need to start considering selling content that IS pushing that P2W boundary. At some point, offering more mount skins can't pay the bills because a player starts asking themselves "How many mount skins do I ACTUALLY want?"
  6. OK so to answer their question ... NO, you don't have the data either, yet you make the claims about Anet offering lower quality content because they 'can', implying they are 'sneaking' something by us to take advantage of people for some nefarious reasons ... since you 'see' things. The problem is that you to create the narrative that fits your beliefs based on the things you see. Except you ignore things you can't see (or don't want to see) that don't fit that narrative. That's how conspiracy theory works. I really don't get this mentality. I'm not going to debate if you like the content or not, but no one should be pretending that how they feel or their subjective opinions about content should be some indicator to Anet about the quality of that content or the value it brings to players.
  7. No, it's not about me or you or any individual. It's about EVERYONE. So when people make general claims that the quality of the content is decreasing, that's THEIR assessment. They don't speak for anyone else. So what those people making those claims need to do is stop pretending like how they feel and their subjective opinions are related to general truths about how everyone feels about the game and therefore ... Anet is doing things wrong or bad. Again, if the game was about ME ... Anet would be coming to ME and asking ME what I wanted and making the game how I want. That's not happening. That can't happen. Service-providing businesses that require large numbers of people to be successful just don't work that way. You already know how this works. The money talks. If people are GENERALLY not seeing the value in the content, they will not buy the content. If they are, they will. If enough people do buy it, it will work as a business. That's what matters. Anet does not care if some particular player does or does not buy something. That factors in EXACTLY ZERO to their decisions on how the game changes or the content they offer.
  8. I made no "admission" as to how I label SoTo so ... 🤡 The absurd thing is that this kind of comment shows how bad people miss the point. The discussion here isn't about how you label the content because whether it's an 'expansion' or not is irrelevant. It's about the value it delivers you for the price Anet charges for it. I mean, SOMEHOW people forgot how buying stuff works. Whether something has value to you is a YOU decision, not some general assessment the general population makes for you. Whether Anet can make a business out of GW2 selling content depends on WAY more factors than if they are making 'expansions' or not.
  9. That's the problem with what you are saying. The question isn't about quality, it's about value ... and whether the game is 'lower quality' is a subjective assessment. You simply don't speak for everyone about the quality of the game. You feel you get less quality? OK ... you also get to determine if you want to pay for that lower quality in more frequent and smaller amounts. That's where some of the value comes in. Again, if content doesn't have value to you, you don't have to buy it. Anet isn't 'sneaking' anything past you for whatever nefarious reasons you think they can. That's just some bad acting narrative painting Anet as some villain because you are bitter about not getting expansions.
  10. Why not? That doesn't make sense to say those decisions shouldn't be defended if the result is that Anet can still provide a level of service that is worth it for the people that play it. You just don't want people to defend because you don't like it. Also, it doesn't need to be defended. Anet is in charge here. Sure ... except that's not determined by their sole measure of if it's a good game according to you. Look I get you don't like how the game has progressed, but it's not about you. All that you can do is ask yourself if playing the game is worth your own time and money. If it's not, then don't. Anet simply isn't going to deliver a game based on your standard of what is good. Bottomline: Anet's decisions to change the game business model has nothing to do with how you feel about it.
  11. Well, you can claim that if you like but you shouldn't convince yourself it's true. The fact is that if it's worth it to you or anyone else has nothing to do with how the decision to make the change was made. EXACTLY ... which means there are REASONS Anet made the hard decision to change the business model if they knew that some people would regard that as a degradation in service. Except the thing you are wrong ... they don't get away with it. It DOES affect them. They KNOW that. They made that decision ANYWAYS. The idea that Anet was trying to sneak something past people and get away with it is absolute nonsense. The change to the model is obvious to customers here. No one is being 'taken' by something nefarious here.
  12. The fact is that people are TRYING to make it sound like there was no good reason for Anet to change the model, pretending like Anet just wanted to deliver a worse experience to them for frivolity. True we don't know the reasons but ... they are there, whatever they are and people shouldn't assume they weren't fundamental to Anet's ability to provide the game as a service. Also, The claims about the 'randomness' of the business model don't make sense. Until now, the model has ALWAYS been ... you buy expansions, which are VERY similar in content and there is content rolled out in between linked to the purchase of the expansion, also very similar in style between expansions. Also, you can purchase content from the GS. These things haven't changed until the expansions last year.
  13. So you wonder why Anet throttles the content for you ... then literally you say this. Yeah ... it's such a mystery why Anet is trickling out content to people, especially when people complain they rushed through the content and got nothing left to do ... and of course people like that will say it's a GAME problem, not a "I rushed content" problem. I guess we will never figure that one out. 🤔
  14. Well, that makes sense if you exclude all the options that are worse, like where the game just doesn't exist because the expansion business model was no longer working. This kind of question missed the point of the change to the business model in the first place. Like somehow Anet randomly makes these changes for no reason. What is likely is that at the time they had to make the decision to change the model, keeping the expansion model was probably not a option anyways so whether it's 'worth it' has nothing to do with why the decision was made.
  15. Weird sentiment here. You pay to get access to content. You didn't pay so ... it SHOULD be obvious you don't get the content you didn't pay for. As for the claim that the content is pay to win ... that's just absurd. "Winning" has nothing to do with being able to access the weapons. If your definition is so broad, it's ceases to mean anything.
  16. My point is that it doesn't make sense for the OP to complain about being bored because he played out the game to his limit. That's not a game problem. If it was a game problem, the game wouldn't be here because no one would be playing it for the same reasons as the OP. It's simply a sidebar that I think veterans need more changes that impact how the game is played to keep their interests. I'm not going to debate you about your experience with the game. I'm just going to re-iterate that I think it's completely reasonable for the feel of content to evolve with the game or that people won't like everything Anet does with the game. Displeasure with those things is simply a consequence of having preferences based on game experience. Again, this is all just indication that GW2 is following the MMO lifecycle. Someone plays 18K+ hours and gets bored? TOTALLY expected ... BUT ... not a game problem. What we need to do is acknowledge that this result is expected. Here is the answer to the OP: They ask What's next ... more of the same? The answer is YES, the same things we got in HOT, PoF, EoD, IBS, LS and SoTo. It's very standard content delivery and no one should expecting Anet to deliver a whole whack of completely new features affecting how they play the game to keep them interested beyond the content itself.
  17. Well, that's where we disagree. If anyone can predict most of the content and features we will see in an expansion or content release, that defines a standard. When the only part you can't predict is the 'new feature', then it's simply a small exception to that standard.
  18. I don't get you post You apparently disagree but what you are saying here is supporting my point. That content Anet is providing is familiar to us and following a standard formula ... so people get bored and have nothing to do. Now to be fair, Anet has made changes to the game. You see it with changes like introducing roles, addition of relics. Older things like mounts, masteries, infusions. These do qualify as new ideas, we have had them in the last 4 years. I believe those are the things we need to keep people interested beyond the standard offerings. I just don't think what we get is enough, or it's not at a level of significance that maintains veteran's interest over content releases.
  19. Sure and nothing I've said sould give you the impression I don't agree that there isn't a correlation between consumption and quality. Yet despite all the variations we have seen in content quality over the game history, it's still successful and we still have people playing it for 10K+ hours for many years complaining they are bored with nothing to do. So, is that about quality or is that about simply about people fulfilling a level of experience with the game that makes them bored with nothing to do? Like, even if all the content in the game was the highest quality, would that mean anyone playing it never gets bored? I don't think so. The problem here is that as people age in the game, they increase the chance they have played the content out so much that nothing Anet can give them within their standard content delivery is all that interesting or compelling to those people. It's simply unreasonable for people to convince themself that the next thing we get will be better than what we had in the past and that Anet will always deliver content that they want to play that will keep them busy until the next thing. Just think about this. If Anet were to say they are releasing an expansion tomorrow, we already know within 70% or more what we are going to get; new maps with events, some mastery lines, strikes, some shinies, achievements .. you know, the stuff we got for the last 3 expansions, 4 living stories, one Saga and whatever else they are calling the last 2 years. So ... Yahoo I guess? The things that interest veteran players beyond these elements are elite specs and mounts and anything that changes how you think about playing the game because it's THOSE things that make it keep it fresh, EVEN if it's quality is questionable because the players will need to play it to determine that. The only thing that you can really do to keep the game fresh if you hit that wall ... is change the reason you play, which is why you see people doing 'white gear' or 'no death' challenges or just training or carrying players in harder content.
  20. Well, not really no ... because the things you say we have in SoTo aren't new. For example ... flying mounts allowing you to skip the game ... we had that ever since we got them. That's why I'm saying we are getting a standard formula here because we have seen what Anet is offering here in past releases. It's just not that big a departure from the last 11 years.
  21. I mean, I'm not denying anyone their opinion that the contents are different over different content releases. I actually agree with you. The question here is if that's a game problem. I don't see how it is because I think it's very reasonable for content feel to evolve as with the game. But that's a bit of the track for this topic because the OP is literally complaining they have nothing to do. That's a 'them' issue ... because what's happened is that they outplayed the content of the game. I mean, think about this way ... a new player doesn't have 'nothing' to do ... so this 'bored, nothing to do' simply can't be a game problem. It's a problem with people reaching the limit of what they are willing to do in the game.
  22. Not invalidating anything ... again, I'm simply not assuming that 'some people' having a problem with an aspect of the game means it's a game problem. Like, SOMEHOW the content we get in SoTO is SOOO much different than what we seen before? No, it's not. It's following a standard formula that we have seen Anet apply for 11 years now. Yet ... NOW it's a problem and before it wasn't. Nope, not buying it.
  23. Honestly, I think veterans of this game have to recognize the best days are behind us, whatever that 'best days' happens to be for any individual. It's just unreasonable to expect Anet to continue to release content that just gets better than the last thing we got because 1) we already have a lot of content to access and 2) veterans have little to continue farming for in terms of items. Literally, what's left for must of us to do other than experience a new story or commit to mentoring new players? Not much, especially if you don't want to mentor new players. On the other hand, that's why I think we are seeing changes to the content release model ... probably a significant shift in player demographics.
  24. OK but that's not what I'm questioning here. I'm simply establishing the reasonable expectation that the game has limits and it's not unreasonable for some people's thresholds for those limits to be different than others. So some people bored, some people not. The problem here is that this isn't an issue with the game like the OP is trying to frame it. That's simply personal preferences. I'm not debating if players should post their thoughts on the forums or not. I got no problem with that. I AM going to question if an issue someone raises is residing with players or the game itself. Seems to me that players who don't recognize that the game limits are below their tolerance thresholds are mistakening that gap as a game issue. It's likely not unless we have significant departures in quality or frequency of content releases. I think especially true in this case where the OP is 'suddenly' got nothing to do because they have legendary armor and falsely claiming no content to use it in. That doesn't make sense, considering legendary gear isn't there to unlock content in the first place. It's literally a QoL update from Ascended gear, so the OP's expectations are unreasonable. Basically, the OP played themself out if the game. That's not a problem with the game.
  25. Sure ... and how do Anet measure that? It's not by individuals saying they like things or not. It's about measuring the general success of the game. I mean, some people like things and some don't. Somehow people are convincing themselves Anet isn't aware of what those things are unless they are told? Somehow Anet's game data doesn't give them indications of those things or ... ... are people just of the belief that Anet should ignore their game data and just listen to the things they have issues with?
×
×
  • Create New...