Why doesn't GW2 have the option of 1x1 duels??

[Dante.1763]

On 8/30/2021 at 11:09 PM, Just a flesh wound.3589 said:

Apparently it’s not easy to add to the game because of the separation of PvE from PvP as designed by the game at launch. 

 

 

 

10 minutes ago, Sir Alymer.3406 said:

To save you some time here's the TL;DR of this thread.

Person asks why there's not 1v1 duels (EG, right-click, duel option)

many opinions were spread about how horrible they are f or this game.

One (1) actual technical answer as to why it won't work with a reddit thread linking to the dev who said it.  It's somewhere in this thread, I think.  I'm unsure if the post was edited or deleted because I sure as heck can't find it.  For those curious, it's due to how the game handles aggression and mob hostility.

More vitriolic opinions and mud slinging ensues.

It was in the post above, but it cant be linked? Heres the quote though!

"

@"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" (ANet Staff) said:

I'm not against 1v1 dueling, with restrictions to areas. But as other's noted, to do this right requires a lot of work. (Specified duel areas, a way to change the skill ruleset used based on an area rather than a whole map, etc. 

 

We have so many higher priorities that I can't see us ever actually getting to this in the foreseeable future. Especially as we already have the means for players to create their own 1v1's via custom arenas."

[Sobx.1758]

26 minutes ago, Dante.1763 said:

 

It was in the post above, but it cant be linked? Heres the quote though!

"

@"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" (ANet Staff) said:

I'm not against 1v1 dueling, with restrictions to areas. But as other's noted, to do this right requires a lot of work. (Specified duel areas, a way to change the skill ruleset used based on an area rather than a whole map, etc. 

 

We have so many higher priorities that I can't see us ever actually getting to this in the foreseeable future. Especially as we already have the means for players to create their own 1v1's via custom arenas."

Ty for the quote, didn't see that before. Original post from 2018:

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/39724-open-world-duel-option-yay-nay-who-cares/page/7/?tab=comments#comment-645465

 

Edited September 13, 2021 by Sobx.1758

[Dante.1763]

2 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Ty for the quote, didn't see that before. Original post from 2018:

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/39724-open-world-duel-option-yay-nay-who-cares/page/7/?tab=comments#comment-645465

 

Its fairly hard to see on the dark mode forums 😞

[Sobx.1758]

Just now, Dante.1763 said:

Its fairly hard to see on the dark mode forums 😞

Yeah, using dark mode too, had to highlight text to read, then looked for the link in case someone wants better readability 😛

[The Greyhawk.9107]

Good Money says that this thread is locked by Wednesday at the latest.

[Gorem.8104]

No duels, and no simple trade mechanic to make safe trading outside of using the TP's fee's or hoping that you don't get screwed over in the mail. 

 

Both would be great, and its simple to prevent being trolled with a simple option to auto deny all trades/duel requests, then you don't even see it at all if you don't like it. 

 

There is no argument against not adding in duels and trading with that simple option. People who don't want it can still play as if the feature doesn't exist. And the people who want it, get it. 

 

You can't scam people with a real trade system that only allows trades if both parties have highlighted over all changes. 

 

Its essentially a win/win for everyone people for and against both things. There's not much reason to not have it in game, unless the programming behind it would be too hard to implement. 

[The Greyhawk.9107]

1 minute ago, Gorem.8104 said:

No duels, and no simple trade mechanic to make safe trading outside of using the TP's fee's or hoping that you don't get screwed over in the mail. 

 

Both would be great, and its simple to prevent being trolled with a simple option to auto deny all trades/duel requests, then you don't even see it at all if you don't like it. 

 

There is no argument against not adding in duels and trading with that simple option. People who don't want it can still play as if the feature doesn't exist. And the people who want it, get it. 

 

You can't scam people with a real trade system that only allows trades if both parties have highlighted over all changes. 

 

Its essentially a win/win for everyone people for and against both things. There's not much reason to not have it in game, unless the programming behind it would be too hard to implement. 

Options for dueling already exist in game without having to expend large amounts of time and resources to change the OW's aggression system.

[Linken.6345]

27 minutes ago, Gorem.8104 said:

No duels, and no simple trade mechanic to make safe trading outside of using the TP's fee's or hoping that you don't get screwed over in the mail. 

 

Both would be great, and its simple to prevent being trolled with a simple option to auto deny all trades/duel requests, then you don't even see it at all if you don't like it. 

 

There is no argument against not adding in duels and trading with that simple option. People who don't want it can still play as if the feature doesn't exist. And the people who want it, get it. 

 

You can't scam people with a real trade system that only allows trades if both parties have highlighted over all changes. 

 

Its essentially a win/win for everyone people for and against both things. There's not much reason to not have it in game, unless the programming behind it would be too hard to implement. 

No it is sadly not a win/win not for the one that dont want it, they see it as resources wasted that could have been spent on something they might like.

So that is a loss for them.

[AgentMoore.9453]

5 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Now you can show everyone how well you deal with things by accepting such simple truths, or keep whining and complaining for pages upon pages

Yo, are bets open for this one? I already stand to win five bucks and a slice of pizza if the thread hits at least 35 pages but stays under 40, and I'm open to sweetening the pot.

[The Greyhawk.9107]

2 hours ago, AgentMoore.9453 said:

Yo, are bets open for this one? I already stand to win five bucks and a slice of pizza if the thread hits at least 35 pages but stays under 40, and I'm open to sweetening the pot.

With how its going atm?  No way this thread doesn't get locked by Wednesday at the latest.  I don't like the overuse of the word "Toxic" by a lot of people but I can't deny that this thread qualifies.

Edited September 14, 2021 by The Greyhawk.9107

[Astralporing.1957]

4 hours ago, hatozeni.5721 said:

Okay I have a question. Do you like surfing? Do you have a surfboard? Do you know how to surf? Unless I picked a pretty unlucky example... your answer should be no, no and no!
Well, what do you do about surfers when you go to the beach to have fun, go into the sea to play and there are surfers there?

Perhaps on your beaches it is different, but on the ones i have ever been, surfers do not really surf right next to people having fun on the beach. They do it at a safe distance from them. And people do tend to not have fun/swim in the areas where surfers are. because, you know, that can cause accidents.

And yes, if a surfer tried to surf right over my head on a crowded beach, we'd have a problem to solve. And i would not be nice about it.

In the same vein, i have nothing about cars, but i would never try to walk in the middle of the highway. And i would be mightily kitttened off if someone tried to drive on a sidewalk - especially if i was walking on it at the time.

So, leave surfers on the sea, cars on the roads, and duelists in PvP areas. And do not try to surf on a sidewalk in front of my house, please.

Edited September 14, 2021 by Astralporing.1957

[kharmin.7683]

14 hours ago, Sir Alymer.3406 said:

To save you some time here's the TL;DR of this thread.

Person asks why there's not 1v1 duels (EG, right-click, duel option)

many opinions were spread about how horrible they are f or this game.

One (1) actual technical answer as to why it won't work with a reddit thread linking to the dev who said it.  It's somewhere in this thread, I think.  I'm unsure if the post was edited or deleted because I sure as heck can't find it.  For those curious, it's due to how the game handles aggression and mob hostility.

More vitriolic opinions and mud slinging ensues.

Pretty much sums up this and all of the other threads on this topic.

[Kurrilino.2706]

17 hours ago, Gorem.8104 said:

No duels, and no simple trade mechanic to make safe trading outside of using the TP's fee's or hoping that you don't get screwed over in the mail. 

 

Both would be great, and its simple to prevent being trolled with a simple option to auto deny all trades/duel requests, then you don't even see it at all if you don't like it. 

 

There is no argument against not adding in duels and trading with that simple option. People who don't want it can still play as if the feature doesn't exist. And the people who want it, get it. 

 

You can't scam people with a real trade system that only allows trades if both parties have highlighted over all changes. 

 

Its essentially a win/win for everyone people for and against both things. There's not much reason to not have it in game, unless the programming behind it would be too hard to implement. 

A) It's too hard too implement according to an ArenaNet developer.

 

B) It's not a win-win for the PvE people who don't want to be confronted with any kind of PvP.

There is a reason why they play PvE.

 

What about leaving everything like it is, start living in reality where developers already said, it's not coming

and using the myriad of already existing ways to duel 1vs1.

This sounds like a win-win to me

[ArchonWing.9480]

17 hours ago, Gorem.8104 said:

Both would be great, and its simple to prevent being trolled with a simple option to auto deny all trades/duel requests, then you don't even see it at all if you don't like it. 

 

Quote

 

There is no argument against not adding in duels and trading with that simple option. People who don't want it can still play as if the feature doesn't exist. And the people who want it, get it.

Actually, there's a pretty simple argument against it already. You're making it opt-in by default, meaning people that don't want to participate have to manually turn it off. This means not only do people who are out of the loop have to go waste their time to figure out how to turn it off; support will mostly be flooded by complaints on the matter and this will waste a lot of people's time.

 

This detail has been constantly missed by people in this thread.

The solution of course is simple. It should be off by default. But why haven't you and others even thought of that? Because you're putting yourselves first.

Of course, it is not the responsibility of those who do not want duels to provide an argument against it. The people that want duels on the OW are the ones that want to make changes to the game, and it's up on them to prove why they need this additional treatment.  And as much as I hate to say it, you need to get in line.

If you want to get through to people, then you need to take their needs into account, and not simply dismiss them. I mean you can, but I don't think it's very effective.

Edited September 14, 2021 by ArchonWing.9480

[Astralporing.1957]

On 9/14/2021 at 4:31 AM, Gorem.8104 said:

No duels, and no simple trade mechanic to make safe trading outside of using the TP's fee's or hoping that you don't get screwed over in the mail.

On the second part (the direct trading): TP is perfectly safe - way safer than direct trading can ever be (no matter how perfect the trading system mechanics are, the weakest link in that system will always be the human one. TP pretty much removes that weakness, because it becomes way, way harder to scam someone you cannot see and talko to, and even more difficult when that person can compare your trade offer to the offers of other players), and the TP tax is something Anet want you to pay (and one of the primary methods of contolling inflation), so why exactly should they make it easier for you to avoid it?

On 9/14/2021 at 4:31 AM, Gorem.8104 said:

There is no argument against not adding in duels and trading with that simple option.

On the contrary, there are several very good arguments against introducing direct trading subsystems (ones that talk about pros and cons, and impact of those on the game, not just about "i (don't) like that feature"). Practically any thread about those has some.

[schloumou.3982]

18 hours ago, Kurrilino.2706 said:

PvE people who don't want to be confronted with any kind of PvP.

 Yes and the people that don't want to see any violence at all. Think about those too. Why do you allways have kill stuffs.

[costepj.5120]

6 minutes ago, schloumou.3982 said:

 Yes and the people that don't want to see any violence at all. Think about those too. Why do you allways have kill stuffs.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I always start by negotiating with the mobs I meet. I use violence as a last resort. Only last night Joko and I came to an ... arrangement. I'm now his personal envoy to DR.

[sasya neko.1985]

On 9/12/2021 at 11:59 PM, Sir Alymer.3406 said:

  

We also didn't need the legendary armory, build templates, mastery systems, updates that are technically free if you're here for them, raids, fractals, any QoL update, new  PvP game modes, new methods of rewards in wvw/pvp, etc.  At the same time, fishing wasn't needed either but we're getting that.

so what you're saying is that we don't need GW2 yet we have it?

that kinda defeats the point doesn't it....

[Sobx.1758]

On 9/14/2021 at 9:35 PM, Kurrilino.2706 said:

What about leaving everything like it is, start living in reality where developers already said, it's not coming

Yup, "dev already said" that, but it was about "forseeable future" back in 2018.

[Epsilon Indi.2031]

8 hours ago, sorudo.9054 said:

so what you're saying is that we don't need GW2 yet we have it?

that kinda defeats the point doesn't it....

No I'm saying that we don't need the game to update

[The Greyhawk.9107]

9 hours ago, Sir Alymer.3406 said:

No I'm saying that we don't need the game to update

Uhhhhh.....yeah, we do.  Otherwise the game stagnates and dies, it needs new stuff now and then.  But that doesn't mean any and/or all concepts should be implemented.

[Epsilon Indi.2031]

6 hours ago, The Greyhawk.9107 said:

Uhhhhh.....yeah, we do.  Otherwise the game stagnates and dies, it needs new stuff now and then.  But that doesn't mean any and/or all concepts should be implemented.

Okay, let me be more specific for you, since you can't understand what I'm saying.  The  game doesn't need the QoL & New feature updates that have come to it.  It could persist with just content updates. (Which they probably could have done if everything for the base game wasn't hardcoded.)  Now, when you think about how this game  has been managed, the reason for the layoffs, etc.  GW2 was secondary to other projects.  This is why a lot of the shift from temporary content that comes out every 2-4 weeks to once a month, then once every 3 months.  These updates haven't ever really been player  driven, either.  A lot of what ANet does is either neutral towards players, or in spite of players (The latter is more than likely unintentional.  A change to a system to increase game stability sometimes destroys or shifts current  strategies).  Sure there's been times where ANet has changed course (Going from LW updates only being temporary to making them more permanent, shifting what boons remain on person after swapping traits/gear, bringing back public Marionette, and such) But the bulk of updates that come to this game are based on whatever data ANet has, which means if there's enough of a demand for a feature ingame, passively, the work to introduce said feature is proportional to the desire for said feature (as in, how much work do the devs have to do to get the system working), and likely any monetization options.

Using a thing that's already been introduced to the groaning masses on the forums; raids.  There was actually a lot of demand for them, but here's where the problem comes in.  Raids have a lot of production value.  They're big instances chaining events and bosses.  They require new mechanics, art, assets, story, and dialogue.  The players who went in there, tried them, and decided they didn't like raids (or didn't have time for them), made raid production slow as it became less of a priority.  Mix this in with lackluster content releases (A new raid would have put everyone on the same footing in terms of boss experience), a lack of focus on G W2, and the less popular features begin getting dropped.  They've (ANet) still wants to deliver on hardcore content, though.  And they're promising CM strikes using pre-existing content.  This means all they have to develop are new mechanics for the bosses, which,  when we compare that to the list of things needed for raids, reduces it down to one thing to develop further instead of several.

So, in turn, if ANet discovered an easy way to add dueling to the game in the way this thread wants using existing mechanics (Not having to change big amounts of code in the way of shifting how the game engine handles aggro) they'd more than likely do it without regard to the handful of people in this thread expressing their distaste of duels, then tweak it based on feedback. (Duels allowed in certain areas in the open world, etc.)  And this is perfectly fine.

Now if you want a game where it shows that player opinion and influence on the game design shouldn't matter, look no farther than Old School Runescape.  Take a view of how that game evolved from 2001 to 2016 (the original runescape, not the rerelease of the 07 build), then look at the 07 backup for Old School Runescape and how much it's changed over what would be about the same amount of time.  Polls for game updates, in general, have just shown that people will vote out of spite towards a thing than actually voting honestly, which translates back into forum posts; people hating things out of spite for them due to past experiences.  It reminds me of that image of a blue bird hating a cracker snack being offered to it (the concept of introducing a new feature idea), until it takes a bite out of it (Actually playing the content) then bird finds that content enjoyable.  There's also another post somewhere in this thread that breaks down a lot of the argumentation against duels, but I'm not digging that up.

[Savoren.3910]

On 8/31/2021 at 2:36 AM, Dante.1763 said:

They added in probably the best middle ground we will get: Guild Hall Arenas.

An argument could maybe be made to have each city with a closed off arena, but outside of that, No thanks to duels, its one of the few features i dont ever want to see added. Especially open world duels. Had my fill of toxic people in other games with that feature.

I think one of the issues with those is that Guild Halls aren't widely accessible to everyone due to requirements to claim and upgrade them. Another issue is, as far as I know, Guild Hall Arena uses PvE balance as opposed to PvP balance, which isn't what people who want to duel want.

I fully agree with the rest of your post though. I appreciate that Anet didn't add open world duels and world PvP to GW2 and I would very much like it to remain that way.

 

On 8/31/2021 at 2:38 AM, Aplethoraof.2643 said:

a) Toxic people can be toxic without it. It isn't the feature that makes people toxic, no worries about that.

b) A duel requires consent. So you can't be forced into it.

That's not exactly true though. A duel requires consent, but invites to a duel do not. While you can't be forced into a duel, people can still spam you with duel requests even if you don't want to duel and decline them every single time. There is no need to add another thing that can and will be easily used by toxic players to harass others.

[Sobx.1758]

9 hours ago, Savoren.3910 said:

That's not exactly true though. A duel requires consent, but invites to a duel do not. While you can't be forced into a duel, people can still spam you with duel requests even if you don't want to duel and decline them every single time. There is no need to add another thing that can and will be easily used by toxic players to harass others.

People keep talking about the option to opt-out of getting invites, that's a regular thing that comes out with the dueling systems. Blocking the player should obviously also auto-decline the invite even without the need to opt-out of the whole system. So spamming isn't a problem, because you can't be spammed if you don't want to be part of it in the first place.

Edited September 18, 2021 by Sobx.1758

[Savoren.3910]

3 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

People keep talking about the option to opt-out of getting invites, that's a regular thing that comes out with the dueling systems. Blocking the player should obviously also auto-decline the invite even without the need to opt-out of the whole system. So spamming isn't a problem, because you can't be spammed if you don't want to be part of it in the first place.

ESO has the option to opt out of getting duel requests, yet WoW still doesn't have any way to do the same despite having dueling since its launch. Blocking a player doesn't prevent him from sending duel requests either.

Neither of those are a regular thing that comes witih dueling systems. Even if Anet were to add dueling, there is no guarantee for them to add an option opt out of getting duel requests.