T G.7496
-
Posts
561 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by T G.7496
-
-
There is nothing particularly legendary about open world PvE though shrug
-
@DarkEmiLupus.2876 said:
@TwoGhosts.6790 said:@kharmin.7683 said:@susana.7814 said:price reasonable yet?That's a subjective question. How you define reasonable may not be what others define it to be. Clearly, ANet believes it is reasonable.And what do you think?This is a feedback thread.I think for the type of system they created and how is it implanted ingame right now, the price is absolutely and shamefullyabusiveandunreasonable.However...if you watch the gaming industry standardsnowadays(and more expecially the korean online/mmo industry) its totally fine andEVENcould have been put for more cash that it is right now(if korean people were hypothetically in charge of pricing).I agree with you.I quoted the other guy though.The one who seemed to think that what Anet believes is relevant in this thread.It isn't.This is a feedback thread.I was curious what his opinion was.But if they do believe it's reasonable, they're wrong.That won't, sadly, stop some people from wasting their money on this shit.But two wrongs don't make a right.
-
@kharmin.7683 said:
@susana.7814 said:price reasonable yet?That's a subjective question. How you define reasonable may not be what others define it to be. Clearly, ANet believes it is reasonable.And what do you think?This is a feedback thread.
-
@gashen.3874 said:vastly outnumberedcondi everywhereLOST
We'll bring you further updates as the story unfolds.
-
Isn't it great that the whole thing is so intuitive and easy to use. They're also not actually templates, but as long as they're making money, right?
-
The new icon is cringe worthy.And the changes; the relocation, the care bear icon, the glow... it's all a bit needy and awkward. Kind of feel a bit embarrassed for them really.
-
@Mortifera.6138 said:Not trying to be rude, but you could’ve asked in-game instead of making a whole forum thread about it.
Not trying to be rude, but if you felt his thread had no merit you could've just ignored it.Also, I would say Bloodlust.
-
Well, the new Alliance system is the cornerstone of GW3, so we can definitely expect it to release sometime this century.
-
@Obtena.7952 said:
@TwoGhosts.6790 said:@Obtena.7952 said:This could be argued forever because of the dipolarity of the perspectives. The one fact remains that will ALWAYS be there; the risk to use third party software is on the player. This all comes down to a bunch of people who think they are getting screwed over because of a baseline they established for themselves and an expectation they set for Anet from using 3rd party software. That is part of the risk and this is an excellent example of what happens when that risk becomes reality for players who can't accept it.You mean the risk ...No, that's not what I mean AT ALL. I said EXACTLY what I meant ... the risk to use third party software will ALWAYS be on the player. Not recognizing that is being irresponsible, ESPECIALLY if you are going to use dishonest accusations to not accept that fact.No, it was what you meant. Because what other risk, at all, did we (and this is hilarious, by the way) 'irresponsible players' run? The only 'risk' we ran was having our "established baseline" ruined and Anet fail to meet our "expectations". That's how you described the so-called 'risk' of using ARC. I simply unpacked what those expectations were.
There are no dishonest accusations here. There is simply feedback in a feedback thread. A lot of it takes the form of extremely harsh criticism. You don't like that. I don't care.
I guess if Anet would show up here, to their own forums, in their own defence, then perhaps you wouldn't feel so obliged to speak on their behalf.
Sometimes I come to these forums and I learn something new, find myself educated or have my opinion changed.
This is not one of those occasions.
You still haven't answered any of the questions I've asked you. But it doesn't matter. I'm done with you now.
-
@Obtena.7952 said:This could be argued forever because of the dipolarity of the perspectives. The one fact remains that will ALWAYS be there; the risk to use third party software is on the player. This all comes down to a bunch of people who think they are getting screwed over because of a baseline they established for themselves and an expectation they set for Anet from using 3rd party software. That is part of the risk and this is an excellent example of what happens when that risk becomes reality for players who can't accept it.
This is an absurd bow-out.You mean the risk associated with an expectation that a professional game design company might have it within their capability to at the very least match what single individual was able to achieve in his spare time.You're right though, my baseline expectation of Anet has been more realistically calibrated now.
-
@Dawdler.8521 said:
@TwoGhosts.6790 said:Also, you didn't answer my previous question. There appears to be a very sharp divide between the opinions of those people who did use ARC and those that didn't. And there's no mystery about that. ARC was simply better, and I don't mean free (although it was that, too).And its the same reason on the non-arc side - templates are simply better and you get free inventory space. When those that dont use arc outweigh those that do by probably 1,000:1 or something there is no mystery anywhere.I think you missed my point. I don't dispute that the new, so-called templates are better than none. My point is that those people who had no experience of using ARC Templates have nothing against which to compare Anet's rubbish; they have a very narrow frame of reference.Some people appear to be satisfied with that, and with what they got. That doesn't surprise me - it's disappointing, but not surprising.Other people, myself included, are deeply dissatified. And not through any lack of understanding. Quite the opposite.This is the Official Feedback Thread About Build & Equipment Templates.I believe I'm in the right place.
-
@Obtena.7952 said:
@TwoGhosts.6790 said:@Obtena.7952 said:@TwoGhosts.6790 said:@Obtena.7952 said:@"Nick.5276" said:You are correct that people don’t have to buy into the system. People HAVE TO USE the new system though if they are to get back any of the functionality Anet took away to implement the new system. To get any BENEFIT of the new system you DO HAVE to buy into it. By changing how the game functions they have manipulated the environment to exclude other options.WOAH WOAH ... this is NOT correct. I can and STILL manually swap to have 'build templates' on certain characters ... or simply swap characters that I've created of the same class with different builds. No option that existed as part of the game for 'swapping builds' has been excluded by build templates. Functionality was NOT removed or taken away because that functionality was never part of the game itself. Even if you want to argue that doesn't matter, Anet did not remove it ... the creator did that under agreement with Anet.Well, I played a version of the game that included ARC Templates. This was, in fact, explicitly excluded by Anet's BS version.It's much, much worse now.It's shameful really.No, you didn't because ARC Templates were not part of GW2; they were a third party add on. Also, Anet's version of the game didn't exclude ARC ... the creator of ARC removed them in agreement with Anet. Being honest here is VERY important in this discussion. There is nothing shameful about Anet protecting their IP.I didn't mention them being ashamed about protecting their IP, you did.I'm well aware of the agreement deltconnected made with Anet.Are you sure pedantry isn't more important than honesty here?Out of interest, were you an ARC Templates user?This isn't pedantry. It's just being impartial. You said "It's shameful really." Clearly, you don't realize this whole issue is ALL about Anet's IP protection; there was NO other reason for them to implement this feature so late in the game in the first place except to protect that IP. And yes, protecting your IP is about making some money, just in case you think i'm trying to obfuscate the discussion. Making money is a major reason to protect your IP as a business. If there wasn't some revenue to be made, we would still be using ARC.You keep making wrong assumptions about what I do and do not understand.
Now, for the avoidance of doubt... do you believe that the approach Anet has taken to 'protecting their IP' in this instance is acceptable? Quality, execution, value.
To be clear, I do not. Not in terms of quality of product, and certainly not in terms of price point and value for money relative to that quality.
Also, you didn't answer my previous question. There appears to be a very sharp divide between the opinions of those people who did use ARC and those that didn't. And there's no mystery about that. ARC was simply better, and I don't mean free (although it was that, too).
Finally, I am not remotely interested in impartiality. I am not impartial in this. I was partial to a bit of ARC with my GW2, and I'm deeply upset now that it's off the menu since the alternative is so unpalatable and overpriced.
-
@Obtena.7952 said:
@TwoGhosts.6790 said:@Obtena.7952 said:@Nick.5276 said:You are correct that people don’t have to buy into the system. People HAVE TO USE the new system though if they are to get back any of the functionality Anet took away to implement the new system. To get any BENEFIT of the new system you DO HAVE to buy into it. By changing how the game functions they have manipulated the environment to exclude other options.WOAH WOAH ... this is NOT correct. I can and STILL manually swap to have 'build templates' on certain characters ... or simply swap characters that I've created of the same class with different builds. No option that existed as part of the game for 'swapping builds' has been excluded by build templates. Functionality was NOT removed or taken away because that functionality was never part of the game itself. Even if you want to argue that doesn't matter, Anet did not remove it ... the creator did that under agreement with Anet.Well, I played a version of the game that included ARC Templates. This was, in fact, explicitly excluded by Anet's BS version.It's much, much worse now.It's shameful really.No, you didn't because ARC Templates were not part of GW2; they were a third party add on. Also, Anet's version of the game didn't exclude ARC ... the creator of ARC removed them in agreement with Anet. Being honest here is VERY important in this discussion. There is nothing shameful about Anet protecting their IP.I didn't mention them being ashamed about protecting their IP, you did.I'm well aware of the agreement deltconnected made with Anet.Are you sure pedantry isn't more important than honesty here?Out of interest, were you an ARC Templates user?
-
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Nick.5276 said:You are correct that people don’t have to buy into the system. People HAVE TO USE the new system though if they are to get back any of the functionality Anet took away to implement the new system. To get any BENEFIT of the new system you DO HAVE to buy into it. By changing how the game functions they have manipulated the environment to exclude other options.WOAH WOAH ... this is NOT correct. I can and STILL manually swap to have 'build templates' on certain characters ... or simply swap characters that I've created of the same class with different builds. No option that existed as part of the game for 'swapping builds' has been excluded by build templates. Functionality was NOT removed or taken away because that functionality was never part of the game itself. Even if you want to argue that doesn't matter, Anet did not remove it ... the creator did that under agreement with Anet.Well, I played a version of the game that included ARC Templates. This was, in fact, explicitly excluded by Anet's BS version.It's much, much worse now.It's shameful really.
-
@Poormany.4507 said:
@Trise.2865 said:Tell that to all the people who demanded the feature in the first place, despite constant warnings of exactly this happening.Most people who wanted build templates (not loadouts), myself included, were expecting a system similar to GW1 and/or the now blocked ArcDPS plugin: easy to understand and use, no cluttered/complicated interface, and most importantlyunlimitedandfreetemplate storage. We didn't get any of that, hence many people are justifiably upset and want other options and/or for the current system to get a major revamp. The current system seemed to have been rushed out for quick monetization without making sure it is up to quality and player expectations/feedback.This.
-
We need to be patient.It's only been two years.There are far more pressing matters.For example, at the moment they are working hard to change two variables on the Warclaw.It's a high pressure environment.
-
@Blindefender.9834 said:I am having trouble understanding how the recently added GW2 Load Out system works.
You're not the only one.
-
Warclaw is fine now as it is.But I suppose its main purpose now is to give the WvW guy at Anet something to fiddle with while everything else goes to shit.
-
Also, while you're at it, for the love of God, please fix the Warclaw replacing default PvE mount selection. It's been months now. How hard can it fkn be?
-
Wow, another fantastic QoL feature brought to you by Anet, the team that brought you build templates.
-
Shiny infographic.Funny that for the WvW card the graphic prolly took longer than the info.
-
@Svarty.8019 said:
@"TwoGhosts.6790" said:Fiddling while Rome burns.Rearranging the furniture as the house collapses.I believe you're looking for, "rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic."Thank you, I missed that one.
-
3 months.2 variables.Impressive work rate.
-
Fiddling while Rome burns.Rearranging the furniture as the house collapses.
Did Dailies get harder? (Returning player!)
in Guild Wars 2 Discussion
Posted
I think what you're experiencing is that, when you buy each expansion, the dailies suddenly start to include things in those areas (maguuma wastes, desert), at the expense of core tyrian dailies. I remember this happening myself now, but only since you mentioned it, so you will get used to it.
But I think the answer to your question would have to be that completing dailies gets more annoying than it used to be with each expansion you buy. At first. And then you get used to it.