EoD Main Features look like they were done in a week......

[Xanadrine.4352]

You know the sad thing is this games combat system is dang good, they could do so much with the classes here as another poster stated. This could be the only game that can get it all right for those types of classes, because something is lacking in the combat and skills system gameplay with just about everygame. but i could see GW2's system being able to do it. 

[Sobx.1758]

21 minutes ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

You're side-stepping the point. It's a common sense and basic marketing and economic principle. If all the mechanics and puzzle pieces fall into place to do something that makes billions of dollars because it's in high demand by the market, and you have the means to supply that demand really easily when all of your competitors are failing to do it effectively, AND you are releasing a regionally-themed expansion where said move would be extremely appropriate, veering in a completely different direction for the sake of it is like staring free money in the face and saying "nah, I'm good,". It violates the basic principle of supply and demand, and market competition.

No, I'm not sidestepping a point there (btw I've just added/reworded something in the previous post in regards of your "takes" on the matter and responses you've received) -ranting about placeholder icons and claiming it has any relevance at "basic marketing" is false. And what "mechanics and puzzle pieces"? You're literally complaining about the weapon choice because you wanted something else. We don't even know how the espec will play (unless I've missed something about it, but somehow doubt), but you've already came to conclusion that it's awful. You like fiery fists, we get it, that's your anime fantasy or w/e. It doesn't mean it's what everyone wants in the game and it doesn't mean it should be implemented in the game just because you want it. You talk about common sense and basic economic principles, so how are you missing this one? Why not wait with your judgement about the espec when we actually know what it does? Because it's not "firy fist martial artist" you wanted? Well, cool -but if that was the line you drew for yourself when judging the espec then statistically you've set yourself up for a disappointment.

Quote

A company like ArenaNet simply does not have the money to make such missteps and walk away unscathed. My husband works in the videogame industry and has experience working on MMORPGs, therefore he can speak with greater authority than I.

Maybe stop pretending you know Anet from the inside for the sake of making these random claims. You don't know what they can or can't do. And, again, your husband has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Quote

You're just being dismissive to be difficult on the internet, and missing the greater issue here.

See, that's also what I've added to my last post, guess a minute too late:

"...and if someone claims they like what you don't... it means they're actively destroying the game (which is also what you've wrote above, after complaining about someone "shutting down discussion" 🙄)" 

You're as dismissive as all he people you accuse about being dismissive. People don't destroy the game or shut down the discussion just because they like what you dislike, which is the conclusion you've tried drawing out in one of your posts above.

Edited September 12, 2021 by Sobx.1758

[ugrakarma.9416]

On 9/10/2021 at 4:44 PM, Luclinraider.2317 said:

There is so much that this expansion could bring to help this game push from 10-12 at its current population into the Top 5.....

-Housing

-WvW expansion

-No downed state in PvP to help the Esport Scene revive

-Permanent 2v2 and 3v3 Arena brackets for the same as above.

-A new class

-A new race

Skiff and fishing come from a list like that.

[shrew.3059]

27 minutes ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

This is such an idiotic thing to say. It shuts down discussion without actually responding to the points constructively.

 

You’re right, because there is nothing constructive I could say. These forums treat the developers like their job is to fulfil their fantasies, like they have intimate knowledge of their constraints and plans. And frankly, it comes off as whiny and entitled. It’s one thing to say “I would like…” and another to say “This game is a failure unless I get…” But you do you.

[Crono.4197]

I really wonder how some people think that a game is bad just because it doesn't fit their own ideals...it's like developers can't have their own ideas anymore and other players are not allowed to enjoy the game unless they also do.

I don't like WoW or FF14, but I don't say those games are bad just because I don't like them and that those games should change just because I say so, they're just not for me. How come it's so hard for some people to understand that people like different things?

Edited September 12, 2021 by Crono.4197

[Ghostkat.9580]

8 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

 

No, I'm not sidestepping a point there (btw I've just added/reworded something in the previous post in regards of your "takes" on the matter and response you've received) -ranting about placeholder icons and claiming it has any relevant outcome at "basic marketing" is false. And what "mechanics and puzzle pieces"? You're literally complaining about the weapon choice because you wanted something else. We don't even know how the espec will play (unless I've missed something about it, but somehow doubt), but you've already came to conclusion that it's awful. You like firy fists, we get it, that's your anime fantasy or w/e. It doesn't mean it's what everyone wants in the game and it doesn't mean it should be implemented in the game just because you want it. You talk about common sense and basic economic principles, so how are you missing this one? Why not wait with your judgement about the espec when we actually know what it does? Because it's not "firy fist martial artist" you wanted? Well, cool -but if that was the line you drew for yourself when judging the espec then statistically you've set yourself up for a disappointment.

Maybe stop pretending you know Anet from the inside for the sake of making these random claims. You don't know what they can or can't do. And, again, your husband has absolutely nothing to do with it.

See, that's also what I've added to my last post, guess a minute too late:

"...and if someone claims they like what you don't... it means they're actively destroying the game (which is also what you've wrote above, after complaining about someone "shutting down discussion" 🙄)" 

You're as dismissive as all he people you accuse about being dismissive. People don't destroy the game or shut down the discussion just because they like what you dislike, which is the conclusion you've tried drawing out in one of your posts above.

You haven't reworded anything. You made a strawman fallacy, and you continue to do so, while showing your lack of understanding of how things work.

I wasn't making random claims about ArenaNet. My husband works in the videogame industry and I mentioned you can look this stuff up on Glassdoor to see for yourself the state that their company is in, and what they can and cannot afford. Considering he does this stuff for a living, and has seen his fair share of the insides of companies as well as various engines, and understands how much work is involved, how much things cost and how long things take at even bigger companies with more money and more expensive talent, he is in a position to draw educated conclusions based on his experience. You being dismissive of that holds no water other than making you look difficult on the internet for the sake of it, and carries no real substance other than you wanting to defend something based on your ignorance to validate how you want to feel. You just don't know any better and are too stubborn to admit it, so you shoot the messenger instead of respecting one's experience, or actually addressing the merits of their statements point by point.

Design philosophy is what it is, and so are certain decisions. My husband has worked for quite a few companies and can speak to such things. When we have years of companies having tried these things out and seeing what works and what doesn't, and we see a decision being made that clearly looks like exactly what it is (i.e. someone had an idea that sounded nice to them on paper but they clearly didn't understand how those things don't necessarily work in practice, for example, the 6 skill on Willbender), we  can call it for what it is. You don't need to be super knowledgeable about the ins and outs of what their internal situation is to look at a bad idea poorly implemented that clearly didn't learn from other games that have tried that same solution, and call it like you see it. My husband having worked on projects where he has had to problem-solve these things gives him a perspective you don't have, that lets him be able to see whether or not these decisions were rushed. He is experienced enough that he can tell by looking at the work, not unlike how when you submit a portfolio for a job application, an art director only needs to glance at your work for an instant before knowing whether or not you're equipped for the responsibilities of the job.

I don't need to have an inside look at ArenaNet to know what is public knowledge and common sense when it comes to supply and demand with public economic figures and the sensibilities of a region my husband and I have both lived in, which this expansion is directly targeted toward. I'm saying, as a member of the target demographic, this isn't impressing us as a group. You can take me speaking for myself in that manner as you will. But again, such a remark is an ad-hominem attack, not a substantive reply to the point at hand, just rhetoric to say nothing more than "I don't want to listen to what you have to say,".

As for the financial figures I mentioned, again, there's publicly available data regarding the consolidated annual growth rate of the market they're trying to get with this expansion, and you can go look those up. Calling those "assumptions' just because I'm not force-feeding you links is just silly and it makes you look like you're an internet troll who doesn't want to acknowledge facts he doesn't wish to hear because he wants to validate how he wants to FEEL.

None of this has anything to do with necessarily what I want. The ONE thing I want is just one single example of a global problem the expansion is showing to have at this time. It just happens to be a really good example and a very easy punching bag, all things considered.

That being said, I wasn't being "as dismissive as all the people I accuse as being dismissive,". That comment was addressed at a single person who didn't actually respond to the points I made. Like you, he just makes general statements to sweep anything he doesn't want to actually constructively respond to under the rug, so he can continue validating how he wants to feel. I actually made concrete remarks, so that isn't a valid reply.

Your entire response is basically to say, "no, YOU!" without actually addressing the merits or points with knowledge or understanding. It's a whole lot of "here are the reasons why I don't want to listen to what you have to say," instead of "here are my thought-out counterpoints which effectively shoot down your arguments,". It's like you never learned the art of debate and are just, at best, an amateur at internet trolling. Until and unless you can make an informed reply with some more effort put into it than that, then you ARE being nothing other than dismissive on the internet because you are seeking validation out of being contrarian in public. That's not the same thing as making actual points, and someone else already responded to the first individual to do that by pointing out that my points themselves had merit, highlighting the absurdity of their response. Maybe read the room and realize that pushing that rhetoric isn't helping your case any. 😉

 

[Sobx.1758]

11 minutes ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

That being said, I wasn't being "as dismissive as all the people I accuse as being dismissive,". That comment was addressed at a single person who didn't actually respond to the points I made.

🤔

1 hour ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

People like you are why Guild Wars 2 can't have nice things. You keep making excuses that give this game permission to be less than it could be.

Nah, you disliked something about the expansion and the direction they took with the ele espec, so now if someone likes it, THEY ("people like you") are responsible for the game being in a bad state (according to you -because, apparently it can't have nice things due to those people that like what you dislike). What you're complaining about here is that anet isn't changing the game according to your individual personal opinions. But that's not how game development works.

Hope it's clear enough now. 🙂

Edited September 12, 2021 by Sobx.1758

[Ghostkat.9580]

22 minutes ago, shrew.3059 said:

 

You’re right, because there is nothing constructive I could say. These forums treat the developers like their job is to fulfil their fantasies, like they have intimate knowledge of their constraints and plans. And frankly, it comes off as whiny and entitled. It’s one thing to say “I would like…” and another to say “This game is a failure unless I get…” But you do you.

I never said any of those things. I made concrete points regarding the state of the market, the mechanics and everything else involved. What you're doing is making a strawman argument to conduct an ad-hominem attack, which makes it look like you didn't read what I had to say at all. What I am upset I didn't get isn't the issue. That's a symptom of a bigger problem which is affecting other parts of the game that I personally have no vested interest in, but other parts of the community have chimed in similarly, discussing the actual mechanics at hand, the presentation, etc.

Regardless, it is a fact that MMORPGs have different classes that are styled how they are to cater to different types of power fantasies. That's part of why these games exist with the options that they do. That's an irrefutable fact. I'm not saying the game needs to cater to me. I'm pointing out the business logic of releasing an expansion themed after the Orient, then very transparently doing a half-baked job at trying to chase the coat-tails of another game without learning the lessons it needs to in order to attract that game's demographic, while similarly having all the mechanics it needs to in order to compete in that sphere but then choosing not to. Those are FACTS. My OPINION is that such a thing is one hell of a missed opportunity, but I can reinforce that with data and financial figures to solidify my point.

I can say on my own behalf that it reduces my own interest, and the interest of others whom I have spoken to. I can also point to certain design decisions which my husband, as a greater authority than either of us here on the subject, can point to and say "this doesn't learn X, Y or Z lesson from a game development perspective" or "based on my knowledge of how long this would take to rectify at a company with some of the industry's top talent and the money to afford them, five months isn't enough time to fix these issues,".

You have not offered a counter-argument to this, just more strawman arguments and ad-hominem attacks to sweep your opposition under the rug. That tells me you don't have a very good counter-argument outside of "I just don't want to listen to what you have to say," heaven forbid you learn something of value and use your head for a change instead of puffing out your chest on the internet.

So yes, you completely missed the point... intentionally side-stepping it.

[Ghostkat.9580]

Just now, Sobx.1758 said:

🤔

Nah, you disliked something about the expansion and the direction they took with the ele espec and if someone likes it, THEY ("people like you") are responsible for the game being in a bad state (because, apparently it can't have nice things due to those people that like what you dislike).

Hope it's clear enough now. 🙂

Nah, you didn't actually read what I had to say. This is the conclusion you drew when you didn't actually pay attention to what was written.

Hope it's clear enough that I said this twice now, unless you want to keep arguing this point of yours so you don't have to acknowledge when I've now told you directly TWICE what the situation is. 😉

Keep digging your hole, though, kid, and see how far that gets you.

[sorudo.9054]

in terms of open world PvE there is nothing really new, and with new i don't mean a new espec because that more an addition rather than an actual new thing.

fishing isn't "new", it's something extra that should be in the game since launch and not something to be exited about when introducing an expansion.

 

what we need is something actually new, something that impacts the game permanently which really lures players.

something like a better movement mastery where mounts simply don't cut it and where gliders are useless, something like stealth in bushes and wall jumping to get to difficult places, maybe even making crawling a thing so we can get trough tight spots we previously could not get to.

[Sobx.1758]

13 minutes ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

Nah, you didn't actually read what I had to say. This is the conclusion you drew when you didn't actually pay attention to what was written.

Hope it's clear enough that I said this twice now, unless you want to keep arguing this point of yours so you don't have to acknowledge when I've now told you directly TWICE what the situation is. 😉

Keep digging your hole, though, kid, and see how far that gets you.

Cool, explain this then: People like you are why Guild Wars 2 can't have nice things. You keep making excuses that give this game permission to be less than it could be. 

"People like you" alone proves it's not directed at a single person, but instead at the group of people "that are like the person" you're responding to. The post you've quoted ("Sounds like you should build your own game, rather than expecting ANet to do it for you") also proves it's absolutely about the game not cathering to your individual needs, because that's clearly what he was talking about and that's exactly what you were responding to.

Whatever your husband thinks about it, the game devs CAN afford not cathering to your individual wishes. You might not like it, but it won't make it any less of a fact. Namecalling won't do anything about that either.

Edited September 12, 2021 by Sobx.1758

[Ghostkat.9580]

3 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Cool, explain is then: People like you are why Guild Wars 2 can't have nice things. You keep making excuses that give this game permission to be less than it could be. 

"People like you" alone proves it's not directed at a single person, but instead at the group of people.

Again, those are ad-hominem attacks, not responding to the point.

By doing this, and not addressing the actual issues, you are doing exactly what I'm accusing you of, because instead of addressing the points of merit in my argument, you're only being dismissive of what I have to say. Instead of making any counter-points to the merits of what I mentioned, all you have done is dismiss, and you've been dismissive for the sake of being dismissive, not because you have any meritorious point to make, all because I'm telling you things you don't want to hear, regardless of how much you may need to. You distilled down what I wrote into something that wasn't what I was actually saying to sidestep the actual point being made, which is a strawman argument, and another person already addressed that . This is nothing short of internet trolling on your part.

Spamming confused emotes after you've already shown you haven't read the point at hand and are doing exactly what I called you out on isn't helping your case.

So yes, when we are here on the forums to give feedback, when the OP expressed feedback about him being disappointed with the reveals so far in a way that may affect his decision to continue financially supporting the game, and when I respond to his detractors who tried to excuse what has been revealed so far with "there are 5 months left until release" with "realistically-speaking, 5 months isn't enough time to fix the more major issues we are seeing," and I go into detail with why, responding by just being dismissive and ONLY being dismissive for the sake of it is very much so not productive discussion.

We're trying to have productive discussion here on the expansion based on the reveals thus far, to voice our thoughts in the hopes that it can be in the best shape that in can be, and launch when it's really ready to and not prematurely (Cyberpunk 2077, anyone?). Trying to silence us with personal slights gets in the way of that being heard, simply because scat-posting on the internet like you live in the echo-chambers of Reddit is the popular behaviour amongst children like you these days, does drown out the more constructive voices who really want this to do well. The quantity of people like you, who drown out the voices of others with such dismissive behaviour, is indeed why this game can't have nice things. You aren't the only one doing these things.

Ergo, you are proving me right. Take your attitude back to the Reddit echo-chambers where it belongs, this community deserves better than the likes of you, troll.

[Sobx.1758]

2 hours ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

Again, those are ad-hominem attacks, not responding to the point.

No, they're not. They're responding to what you said, quote EXACTLY what you said alongside the post you were responding to and explaining why what you said is understood in the way it is. You're the one calling me "a kid" here and then try to complain about "ad-hominem attacks". 🙄

At this point there's nothing wrong with the upcomming ele espec, despite you trying to claim otherwise based solely on the fact that it's not what you wanted it to be. We don't even know what it will do, but you're already here at arms trying to come up with claims about the weapon choice "making or breaking" the whole thing. It just doesn't. If it does for you, then it's your individual opinion that doesn't do much for the overal approval (or lack of it) of the expansion.

2 hours ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

Ergo, you are proving me right. Take your attitude back to the Reddit echo-chambers where it belongs, this community deserves better than the likes of you, troll.

Again, what was that about "ad-hominem"? Very obviously you're the one throwing random insults at me in your last few posts, not the other way around.

Edited September 12, 2021 by Sobx.1758

[Linken.6345]

8 minutes ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

Again, those are ad-hominem attacks, not responding to the point.

By doing this, and not addressing the actual issues, you are doing exactly what I'm accusing you of, because instead of addressing the points of merit in my argument, you're only being dismissive of what I have to say. Instead of making any counter-points to the merits of what I mentioned, all you have done is dismiss, and you've been dismissive for the sake of being dismissive, not because you have any meritorious point to make, all because I'm telling you things you don't want to hear, regardless of how much you may need to. You distilled down what I wrote into something that wasn't what I was actually saying to sidestep the actual point being made, which is a strawman argument, and another person already addressed that . This is nothing short of internet trolling on your part.

Spamming confused emotes after you've already shown you haven't read the point at hand and are doing exactly what I called you out on isn't helping your case.

So yes, when we are here on the forums to give feedback, when the OP expressed feedback about him being disappointed with the reveals so far in a way that may affect his decision to continue financially supporting the game, and when I respond to his detractors who tried to excuse what has been revealed so far with "there are 5 months left until release" with "realistically-speaking, 5 months isn't enough time to fix the more major issues we are seeing," and I go into detail with why, responding by just being dismissive and ONLY being dismissive for the sake of it is very much so not productive discussion.

We're trying to have productive discussion here on the expansion based on the reveals thus far, to voice our thoughts in the hopes that it can be in the best shape that in can be, and launch when it's really ready to and not prematurely (Cyberpunk 2077, anyone?). Trying to silence us with personal slights gets in the way of that being heard, simply because scat-posting on the internet like you live in the echo-chambers of Reddit is the popular behaviour amongst children like you these days, does drown out the more constructive voices who really want this to do well. The quantity of people like you, who drown out the voices of others with such dismissive behaviour, is indeed why this game can't have nice things. You aren't the only one doing these things.

Ergo, you are proving me right. Take your attitude back to the Reddit echo-chambers where it belongs, this community deserves better than the likes of you, troll.

Well its good to see you were wrong about reaper atleast looks like ffIV copied gw2 there since its been in this game since late 2015.

And just because warrior have a gun and the picture seem to wield a blade dont make it a gunblade.

Do remember that people speculated for afew weeks if mesmer had spear, bow or dagger all based on the teaser image.

Edit

If you want to talk about a gunblade then look no further then holosmith one if the skill it uses litteraly turn their blade into 2 guns.

Edited September 12, 2021 by Linken.6345

[Ghostkat.9580]

1 minute ago, Sobx.1758 said:

No, they're not. They're responding to what you said, quote EXACTLY what you said alongside the post you were responding to and explaining why what you said is understood in the way it is. You're the one calling me "a kid" here and then try to complain about "ad-hominem attacks". 🙄

You quoted me, but then re-constructed what I said to make points that were different. That's called a strawman fallacy. Quoting someone saying X and then attacking them with "you're basically saying Y and this is why I don't want to listen to you" is still a strawman fallacy. When you use that to attack someone as a person, that's still an ad-hominem attack.

So you're still proving me right. Still stop. I'm calling you a kid because that's how you're acting, and you're trolling to derail the discussion (which is against the forum rules, by the way). If you're going to act like you're 12, you shouldn't be surprised if that's how adults treat you.

[Sobx.1758]

15 minutes ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

You quoted me, but then re-constructed what I said to make points that were different. That's called a strawman fallacy. Quoting someone saying X and then attacking them with "you're basically saying Y and this is why I don't want to listen to you" is still a strawman fallacy. When you use that to attack someone as a person, that's still an ad-hominem attack.

I literally explained to you step-by-step why it reads the way it does and asked you to explain, but you didn't bother (or didn't respond beacuse you understood what you've wrote after re-reading it? Who knows). You can still respond to that post and tell me at which points my -as direct as possible, from my understanding- interpretation is wrong.

 

I'm not trying to derail anything here. You claim it's bad because the espec isn't what you wanted it to be (based on the weaponchoice anet made, because we literally don't have any other information about it right now). I'm answering directly to what you said in this thread. You don't like what I say, so you throw insults around instead of responding and then pretend I'm derailing. W/e

Edited September 12, 2021 by Sobx.1758

[Ghostkat.9580]

4 minutes ago, Linken.6345 said:

Well its good to see you were wrong about reaper atleast looks like ffIV copied gw2 there since its been in this game since late 2015.

And just because warrior have a gun and the picture seem to wield a blade dont make it a gunblade.

Do remember that people speculated for afew weeks if mesmer had spear, bow or dagger all based on the teaser image.

I wasn't wrong about Reaper. I agree that FFXIV copied Reaper. No disagreement from me there. My point was that game had its Reaper reveal, so it seems like ANet rushed the Harbinger reveal (since we already have Reaper here) because the Necro spec was the next closest thing.

As for the Warrior gunblade... uhhh... it's literally a katana with a trigger and a pistol barrel. If you don't think that's a gunblade, I honestly don't know what to tell you, but if it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, I'm pretty sure we can just call it a duck and we're sure to more likely than not be on the money.

And yes, I remember that with Mesmer. It was really silly that people thought it was anything other than a dagger, considering that the Core Mesmer image shows the Norn lady with a glowing dagger that the Core Mesmer can't actually use. That, plus the floating daggers over her head... same thing. Walks like a duck, talks like a duck... I don't know about you, but in all likelihood I'm willing to bet that's a duck.

And yet, I saw people make ludicrous statements like how they were certain that you could totally see the other end of the spear poking out of her opposite shoulder, when all it takes is for someone to draw a straight line down the blade to see that no such feature is there. This is what happens with echo chambers and mob mentalities... people who don't think for themselves get so wrapped up in wanting to look for reasons to validate how they want to feel, that they'll outright make up stuff that they claim to see with their own eyes to justify its existence, in the face of plain logic and common sense.

[Ghostkat.9580]

Just now, Sobx.1758 said:

I literally explained to you step-by-step why it reads the way it does and asked you to explain, but you didn't bother (or understood what you've wrote after re-reading it? Who knows). You can still respond to that post and tell me at which points my -as direct as possible from my understanding- interpretation is wrong. I also straight up asked you to explain what Ive quoted, but you reverted into a set of personal insults, while claiming I'm the one using ad-hominem.

No, your entire argument for each point was basically "here's why I don't want to listen to what you have to say," without actually addressing the points at hand.

Calling you a "kid" is an observational remark based on your apparent emotional age. If you are offended by that, then speaking as a parent myself, you are most likely younger than my daughter, because an adult would understand that if they're called that, it's usually an indicator that the person speaking to you is older and wiser than you are, and you're exhibiting the righteous indignation of a younger individual. That's something you bring on yourself.

That's very different than trying to silence someone by side-swiping the points they are making by distilling down someone's point into an oversimplification of one example they gave, claiming that's their entire argument, and then making personal attacks at them for it to silence them for telling someone you don't have the maturity to hear. It'd be one thing if you respectably disagreed with my points with actual counter-points, in which case I'd chalk this up to a respectable difference of opinion, but all you've done is be dismissive for the sake of shutting people up who have anything critical to say about the reveals thus far, and chewed me out for addressing someone else who outright admitted their statement wasn't constructive. When you're rushing to the person who admitted my assessment of them was in the right with nothing more than a "no, you" type of response (which is childish in it of itself), followed by trying to silence people telling you things for no other reason than you don't want to listen to what they might have to say, without actually addressing the merits of their points, that does nothing to help the devs who have outright asked us for our feedback, which obstructs what could be helpful feedback for the devs to consider, and that does risk harming the expansion being as good as it can be. Therefore, it is very much so you giving .

On top of all that, it is a generally juvenile attitude to have, so... walks like a duck, talks like a duck... when you exhibit a maturity level that makes you seem younger than my daughter, and a very oversimplified understanding of how the business world works through your own  words, I can draw conclusions about your age, whether it's emotional or chronological. If you don't like that, then act like an adult.

In the meantime, if you're going to continue not reading the room, that you're derailing the discussion at hand and not addressing the actual points (which is in violation of the forum rules), and continue to make strawman arguments, unconstructive remarks and personal attacks that continue derailing the discussion in violation of the forum rules, I'm just not going to entertain you further, and let the mods deal with you when they're back at work tomorrow.

I'd rather have productive discussion about the topic at hand, based on what the OP wrote, instead of constantly responding to you attempting to derail the discussion, so this is the last I have to say to you.

_________________________________________________________________________________

On that point, I agree with Zuldari.3940's statement at the top of this page, because on merit, he is correct. My upset at not getting what I wanted is less about the fact that I wanted it, and more about that point Zuldari made, because we do have the numbers and data to show how massively huge of a market there is for that, and when GW2 has the mechanics, the systems and even the weapon cosmetics already in the game, the expansion is thematically appropriate for that kind of specialization, and all the puzzle pieces are there, and ANet chooses to sidestep that and do something different, regardless of how I personally feel, it feels like a huge financial swing and a miss from a business perspective. My husband doesn't have a dog in this race at all and doesn't care about the specialization I myself wanted, but even from a pure logic standpoint and business standpoint, he finds the move incredibly questionable and disheartening. This is why when I see people expressing that the news to them has been a letdown so far, and I look at the previous round of beta feedback and see a pattern that looks troubling - including outside of the Elementalist, and in other areas of the game that matter to other people, not necessarily things I care about - I think it's important to have a serious discussion about this stuff. It's not about what I wanted and didn't get, but about the bigger picture at hand. The fact that what I wanted and didn't get happens to be an easy example for me to use is purely coincidental, which you seem to have difficulty understanding.

I'm using a specific example for a more general problem and I'm voicing my feedback. Speaking in general here, people shouldn't be making shallow or silly arguments to shut other people up if they can't or won't debate the merits of those points. If you look at my responses to people, I actually make counter-points, point by point. There are people who I know disagree with me, but value that I'm actually putting some thought and effort into making solid arguments.

I will say that as someone who is from the region this expansion is aimed at trying to garner interest from, and I'm also from a particular game's demographic that their marketing seems as though it's intended to try and satisfy, it's doing the opposite for me. That's happening for specific reasons, and I know I'm not alone in feeling that way, as evidenced here, so that's something I really think ANet should take into immediate consideration. I am articulating examples as to why. Elementalist was just one example, and it just so happens that in terms of game mechanics, Elementalist already has solutions to some of the problems that the other elite specs appear to have, so as far as dev feedback goes, perhaps there's a nugget of value there which the devs can take into consideration before the final beta.

If nothing else, even if the changes won't please everyone, perhaps it'll make more people happy than not, and if those changes are going to make more people happy, I don't see why that's such a bad thing and why people should go around shutting others up. On the Elementalist topic specifically, those looking forward to hammer were in the extreme minority anyway; the favoured one was Longbow (which I didn't want, but see the merits of... maybe I don't feel it's as appropriate in THIS expansion compared to the martial arts alternative, but I wouldn't shame anyone for seeing the logic in it).

I don't really see the point in two elite specs both getting hammer. The way I feel is, if the aim is to make hammer usage more desirable, it would have been a better call to re-evaluate the skills on the classes that already have hammer, where it's not seeing so much use. If ANet was going for breaking elite spec rules and looking for more variety, that's yet another reason why main-hand focus would have ticked both of those checkboxes. We will ultimately see what the beta yields later this month, but I'm voicing how I feel for a nice good "I told you so" when it comes out and the majority of people express how they feel it's as underwhelming as pistol on Harbinger turned out to be... and even I fully admit pistol necro was at least a much better idea on paper, what with the Am Fah bandits and all that jazz in GW1.

I do think it would be smart to delay the expansion further, especially considering that GW2 EoD is coming out literally the same month as FFXIV Endwalker 6.1's story expansion, and that reduces the visibility for EoD at launch... which can either be a good thing for ANet if it doesn't launch in the best of shape, or a bad thing if it does and gets overshadowed. Both of which give me reason to say I think it would be for the best in terms of the expansion's launch quality overall for it to get delayed further. Overall - not just in the areas I want - it needs more time in the oven. I do not want EoD to become another Cyberpunk 2077.

[Sobx.1758]

10 minutes ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

No, your entire argument for each point was basically "here's why I don't want to listen to what you have to say," without actually addressing the points at hand.

Calling you a "kid" is an observational remark based on your apparent emotional age. If you are offended by that, then speaking as a parent myself, you are most likely younger than my daughter, because an adult would understand that if they're called that, it's usually an indicator that the person speaking to you is older and wiser than you are, and you're exhibiting the righteous indignation of a younger individual. That's something you bring on yourself.

No, my "entire argument" is EXACTLY what I wrote in my posts, not however you try to present it now.

If you still constantly feel the need to respond with insults then that's all I need to know here. Let me know when you're ready to respond to my posts -for now what I've quoted is as far as I've went with your last post. And sure, when you call someone a "kid" on the internet, it means you're "older and wiser", solid logic. 🤦‍♂️

Edited September 12, 2021 by Sobx.1758

[shrew.3059]

1. It’s one thing to make suggestions, or indulge in a little speculation or wishlisting. It’s even alright to be a little disappointed when those things don’t come to pass. It’s the height of immaturity to throw a textual fit and blame the developers for their failure to follow your suggestions or meet your particular expectations.

 

2. Those who disagree with these sorts of diatribes aren’t necessarily “white knights” or “fanboys/girls”; they aren’t even necessarily getting 100% of what they wished for either. Consider the fact that they might realise you have to meet entertainment where it is, rather than where you would put it. They are also willing to wait how things pan out because they’ve seen enough cycles of panic and hysteria to know that the sky is rarely falling.

 

3. It’s okay to not like something. It’s okay to wish the things you do like were slightly different. It’s also okay to just play a different game if it fulfils your desires more closely. Certainly easier than trying to change another game into your fantasy hybrid.

 

4. People need to stop pretending they have expertise they don’t. I read a lot of claims about what the market wants, or what this/that choice will do to player numbers, or the consequence of giving Eles a hammer, how lazy this/that feature is. How many of these people have actual MMOs design experience? How many have project managed software of this size? Performed a market analysis? Prepared a budget or business model? You might think playing MMOs for years entitles you to speak in these subjects, but it doesn’t. These are hard tasks even when you’ve trained for them. You can have tons of opinions on what you’d prefer, or what you think works or doesn’t mechanically, but unless you have any business or relevant software experience, don’t pretend like ANet has to listen to you. They’d be insane to take the advice of a random internet person with no proven business/design experience. Again, I’m not saying you need specific expertise to have an opinion on what espec you’d like, but you probably need one to determine what your game needs to succeed in the market.

 

All of this to say: you have a perspective to share, and that’s great! But share it within the bounds of your expertise and don’t overreach by claiming you are the only one who can save GW2. Imagine someone coming into your office and raving about how badly you’re doing your job, and tossing a napkin on your desk labelled “Plans to save this company”. Would you take that person seriously? Stick to sharing your experience, and either trust ANet will do their best with that. Which, as it turns out, is the reality anyway; people like me are just generously wasting our time reminding you of it.

[shrew.3059]

8 minutes ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

On that point, I agree with Zuldari.3940's statement at the top of this page, because on merit, he is correct. My upset at not getting what I wanted is less about the fact that I wanted it, and more about that point Zuldari made, because we do have the numbers and data to show how massively huge of a market there is for that, and when GW2 has the mechanics, the systems and even the weapon cosmetics already in the game, the expansion is thematically appropriate for that kind of specialization, and all the puzzle pieces are there, and ANet chooses to sidestep that and do something different, regardless of how I personally feel, it feels like a huge financial swing and a miss from a business perspective.

 

If you present a detailed market analysis, and a development plan to achieve your goals within a budget and that market, maybe you’d be taken seriously. I don’t think it’s worth your time to do any of that, by the way. I’ve done both professionally and nothing I’ve seen here amounts to anything even close to the sort of qualitative or quantitative evidence required to support the argument. Doesn’t necessarily mean you’re wrong, but no one here has any duty to take you seriously if you keep arguing from ignorance.

 

You’re effectively shouting into an operating theatre about how you’d perform the surgery because you’ve watched every episode of House.

[Rogue.8235]

3 hours ago, zombyturtle.5980 said:

Since people really seem incapable of understanding i will make it as clear as i can.

HOT - maps, story - core features

 - elite specs, gliding - game changing features

-adventures, guild halls , raids - side features

 

POF - maps story - core features

elite specs, mounts - game changing features

-adventures, bounties, raids - side features

 

EOD - maps story - core features

elites specs that are lazily done - Totally lacks the game changing features we had from other expansions which is why I think anet is lazy promoting side features like this fill this gap. 

fishing, skiffs, turtle - side features

 

EOD therefore is a lazy and disappointing as it lacks the game changing features from other expansions that made them worthwhile. And its a joke they try and make side features seem like main features. And its sad people will defend this from them. 

 

If you still cant understand my issue then I cant be bothered to explain anymore. 

 

They haven't previewed the bulk of the expansion yet.  Are you of the mindset that if you can't see it it doesn't exist?  I have a 7 month old niece that thinks this too.  It's why peek-a-boo is so much fun for her.

You're only other difference is that you felt the need to add descriptors to the elite specializations of EoD.  You really think things like that make your point.  It's such a juvenile method of attempting to be persuasive.  Literally juvenile, as in my friend's children do this (ages 5-11)

Different kinds of milk:

• Almond Milk
• Chocolate Milk
• Regular milk that is so bland and disgusting and gross and..and..... and it's just bad

Obviously regular milk is the worst, the facts are right there.

 

So let's sum up your issue with EoD, as you described it:

• You haven't previewed all the features so previewed features don't exist, thus it's lacking.
• You dislike the new elite specializations, even though you have no idea what most of them are.  Therefore, elite specializations might as well not exist in EoD.  Therefore, EoD is lacking in features.
• Since you have now discounted everything except for fishing and skiffs, you declare that these are the only things in the expansion.  You then declare that the expansion is lacking because it only has fishing and skiffs.

You then declare that anyone who doesn't understand you're illogical logic and irrational rationale, then there's just no explaining it any further.

 

Yep there's really nothing to rebut here.  There isn't even an argument.  Just a series of declarations that are blatantly not thought through followed by the declaration that anyone who doesn't think just like you is wrong.

Alrighty then.  Good luck to you 👍

 

 

 

Edited September 12, 2021 by Rogue.8235

[shrew.3059]

1 hour ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

What you're doing is making a strawman argument to conduct an ad-hominem attack, which makes it look like you didn't read what I had to say at all.

 

I feel like you might not understand what an ad hominem attack is. I know throwing around logical fallacies is the way people defend themselves on the internet, but assume your interlocutors are familiar enough with the terms to know when you’re misusing them.

 

Making a claim about the nature of your argument is not the same as invalidating it on that basis. I can say your argument comes off as whiny and entitled but claim it fails as an argument because it doesn’t sufficiently support itself. Two different things.

 

You claim to understand how the expansion will perform in the market without supporting this in any concrete way. If you had to formally present your argument to anyone with business or development experience, would they take you seriously? And before you argue “it’s just a forum, my arguments don’t need to meet that standard”, might I suggest you make more reasonable and provable arguments for the current format.

[Hopestealer.2640]

On 9/10/2021 at 7:06 PM, lokh.2695 said:

(O.O I would want none of your suggestions...it's like all the worst suggestion threads somehow welded together...all that was missing is the call for a sub fee or landspears... I think the 2v2, 3v3 Arenas would be ok, very much even, but the rest. No, hard no. read up on it in the forums search function.)

I dunno. It seems to me that having another playable class would be awesome for both us, and ANET's bottom line.

IMO it is far past time they gave us another class to mess with

[Rogue.8235]

1 hour ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

I wasn't making random claims about ArenaNet. My husband works in the videogame industry and I mentioned you can look this stuff up on Glassdoor to see for yourself the state that their company is in, and what they can and cannot afford. Considering he does this stuff for a living, and has seen his fair share of the insides of companies as well as various engines, and understands how much work is involved, how much things cost and how long things take at even bigger companies with more money and more expensive talent, he is in a position to draw educated conclusions based on his experience. You being dismissive of that holds no water other than making you look difficult on the internet for the sake of it, and carries no real substance other than you wanting to defend something based on your ignorance to validate how you want to feel. You just don't know any better and are too stubborn to admit it, so you shoot the messenger instead of respecting one's experience, or actually addressing the merits of their statements point by point.

Extrapolations of personal experience aren't the most reliable sources of information.  Just because one has experience within an industry doesn't mean one is able to accurately depict the inner workings of every firm in that industry.    Expert opinions are still opinions and are not empirically derived.

You also made some rather heavy assertions, in prior posts, that ArenaNet is incompetent.  I am always very skeptical concerning the presumption of incompetency.  

You also draw your conclusions of ArenaNet's internal affairs through the single source of Glass Door.  You seem mature enough to understand that a single source of information is not enough to draw conclusions.

1 hour ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

Design philosophy is what it is, and so are certain decisions. My husband has worked for quite a few companies and can speak to such things. When we have years of companies having tried these things out and seeing what works and what doesn't, and we see a decision being made that clearly looks like exactly what it is (i.e. someone had an idea that sounded nice to them on paper but they clearly didn't understand how those things don't necessarily work in practice, for example, the 6 skill on Willbender), we  can call it for what it is. You don't need to be super knowledgeable about the ins and outs of what their internal situation is to look at a bad idea poorly implemented that clearly didn't learn from other games that have tried that same solution, and call it like you see it. My husband having worked on projects where he has had to problem-solve these things gives him a perspective you don't have, that lets him be able to see whether or not these decisions were rushed. He is experienced enough that he can tell by looking at the work, not unlike how when you submit a portfolio for a job application, an art director only needs to glance at your work for an instant before knowing whether or not you're equipped for the responsibilities of the job.

 "Design philosophy is what it is, and so are certain decisions." is completely meaningless.  Seriously, look at that statement and tell me what it means.  I've noticed that you have a tendency to make meaningless statements and then move on as if there has been a substantive point made.  It makes it difficult to identify the basis for your arguments.

"My husband has worked for quite a few companies and can speak to such things."  Again, what are "such things."  there's no meaning here.  That is because the prior sentence has no meaning.  So far in this paragraph, you have yet to establish any specific facts are than the tautology of decisions and design philosophy as well as you're husbands relatively vague level of experience.

 

You then  proceed to rationalize your opinions with the empirical support of an expert opinion and tautology.  Your opinion doesn't need to be defended, it's just an opinion.  However, when you try to justify your opinion by making fallacious claims, you are now caught in a hole of defending outlandish statements of fact.

 

Following, you go into more vague, unsubstantial statements to prove that you know what you're talking about.  You describe that Willbender skill 6 proves that ArenaNet is poorly executing on bad ideas.  However, you do not make a single, substantive statement of fact here.  

"Apples are bad and horrible.  You don't need to really understand fruit to know what a terrible piece of produce is."

This is the structure of your arguments in this paragraph.  There's really nothing to rebut because doing so will accept a premise yet to be proven true.  Your asserting the incompetency of ArenaNet and using that to explain why the expansion is no good.  Rebutting that the expansion is

y good overlooks your statement about ArenaNet's aptitude.  

Essentially, you're stating that ArenaNet sux and moving on as if there's no argument to be made there.

2 hours ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

I don't need to have an inside look at ArenaNet to know what is public knowledge and common sense when it comes to supply and demand with public economic figures and the sensibilities of a region my husband and I have both lived in, which this expansion is directly targeted toward. I'm saying, as a member of the target demographic, this isn't impressing us as a group. You can take me speaking for myself in that manner as you will. But again, such a remark is an ad-hominem attack, not a substantive reply to the point at hand, just rhetoric to say nothing more than "I don't want to listen to what you have to say,".

You are now making economic arguments.  Where's your data set?  I can show you the ones I typically use, as I have done so in the past:  I use census bureau, Mintel, and IBISWorld.

Anyways, I see no actual argument here for the greater economic impact outside of your household with regards to ArenaNet's design and thusfar previewed content of the expansion.  

You are essentially stating that your household (including you) are not impressed with the expansion.  That's a completely fine personal opinion.  My personal opinion differs from yours, but that's okay.  

 

"public knowledge and common sense when it comes to supply and demand with public economic figures and the sensibilities of a region"  This is meaningless.  There is nothing in here remotely close to actual economic principles.  Don't attempt to reinforce your personal opinion with attempts at formulating a factual basis that end up being completely incorrect.  Opinions are not wrong, but claiming fictitious facts is.

2 hours ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

As for the financial figures I mentioned, again, there's publicly available data regarding the consolidated annual growth rate of the market they're trying to get with this expansion, and you can go look those up. Calling those "assumptions' just because I'm not force-feeding you links is just silly and it makes you look like you're an internet troll who doesn't want to acknowledge facts he doesn't wish to hear because he wants to validate how he wants to FEEL.

To what sources do you refer to?

Again, I use the U.S. Census Bureau, IBISWorld, and Mintel.  I can link census bureau stuff, but I cannot link any of my documents from IBISWorld or Mintel as that would be against the terms of use.  

I have not double checked your financial analysis.  Once I dig up the post I will.  Citing figures with no analysis is okay, that's just sharing data.  Posting data and then drawing conclusions may not be okay, depending on the validity of the premises you use to draw your conclusions.

When researchers and other professionals actually cite their sources, are they force-feeding?  The purpose of linking to a specific source is for ease of validation, otherwise one must approach any of your claims with skepticism concerning its validity.  Citing to specific sources just makes it easier to get past that point of skepticism.

2 hours ago, Ghostkat.9580 said:

I can say on my own behalf that it reduces my own interest, and the interest of others whom I have spoken to. I can also point to certain design decisions which my husband, as a greater authority than either of us here on the subject, can point to and say "this doesn't learn X, Y or Z lesson from a game development perspective" or "based on my knowledge of how long this would take to rectify at a company with some of the industry's top talent and the money to afford them, five months isn't enough time to fix these issues,".
You have not offered a counter-argument to this, just more strawman arguments and ad-hominem attacks to sweep your opposition under the rug. That tells me you don't have a very good counter-argument outside of "I just don't want to listen to what you have to say," heaven forbid you learn something of value and use your head for a change instead of puffing out your chest on the internet.
So yes, you completely missed the point... intentionally side-stepping it.

 

What are the design decisions that are flawed and cannot be rectified in 5 months?  I've been looking for susbtantive statements, and I almost got one here.

This part is more of a personal opinion with an attempt to validate the opinion with extremely vague statements.  You don't need to validate your opinion.  You do need to show how the facts you state are valid.  So far, I have not seen anything that can validate your presumption of the incompetency of ArenaNet (see first section).

The following is how to make valid statements.

On 8/29/2021 at 7:35 AM, Rogue.8235 said:

This was a massive change when it happened.  It brought these convenience items back into the realm of account-wide convenience.  However, the analysis on how to handle inventory slots is different and more complex (from a business strategy viewpoint).  Another thing to keep in mind, it's easy to reduce the base price of your product but stupidly difficult to increase it.  Once you reduce the base price of on of your products, there is almost no chance of reverting it ever again.

I still think bag slot expansions are priced too high.  It's such a marginal benefit, as is, because:

• It is for a single character which brings the context of:
  • Characters are not a permanent part of the account
  • Upgrades for a sole character creates a sunk cost scenario for keeping the character
    • Whether or not to keep a character is now a financial decision rather than one of personal inclination or any other numerous, subjective reasons
• Purchasing the upgrade is a convenience that will not always be accessible (if not playing on the character that uses it)
  • The limited use of the convenience further decreases its value to the player
• Players do, at some gradient level, analyse the marginal benefit of account services before purchasing
  • The marginal benefit of convenience items increases with the number of characters
  • The marginal benefit of a convenience item for one character decreases with each additional character created
• Pricing the single character upgrades to be marginally in-line with other convenience items will prevent buyer's remorse and other negative emotional states
  • The negative bias of human psychology has been shown to require more cognition  and attention, which leads to better memory of negative events and better learning as a result of negative events
    • Corns J. Rethinking the Negativity Bias. Rev Philos Psychol. 2018;9(3):607-625. doi: 10.1007/s13164-018-0382-7. Epub 2018 Feb 5. PMID: 30220944; PMCID: PMC6132407.
    • Retrieved from National Institute of Health - National Library of Medicine
  • The negative bias is not a spontaneous development of adult humans, but is a biological maturation developed from infancy onwards
    • Vaish A, Grossmann T, Woodward A. Not all emotions are created equal: the negativity bias in social-emotional development. Psychol Bull. 2008 May;134(3):383-403. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.134.3.383. PMID: 18444702; PMCID: PMC3652533.
    • Retrieved from National Institute of Health - National Library of Medicine
  • Negative biases do have an empirically measurable effect on the future purchasing behaviors of adults, to which an experience of buyer's remorse is a massive detriment to future sales of a brand.
    • Cherubino P, Martinez-Levy AC, Caratù M, Cartocci G, Di Flumeri G, Modica E, Rossi D, Mancini M, Trettel A. Consumer Behaviour through the Eyes of Neurophysiological Measures: State-of-the-Art and Future Trends. Comput Intell Neurosci. 2019 Sep 18;2019:1976847. doi: 10.1155/2019/1976847. PMID: 31641346; PMCID: PMC6766676.
    • Retrieved from National Institute of Health - National Library of Medicine
    • Note, the primary statistical analysis of this study is through functional MRIs.  
• The marginal benefit of a product within a brand line will affect the perceived value of the other products within the line
  • Positive perception of marginal cost-benefit of products in a brand line reinforces the perception for products not yet purchased or analyzed
  • Negative perception of a single products' marginal cost-benefit deteriorates the perceived value of all other products within the brand line
    • This is especially true post hoc
    • The effect of perceived value on all other products occurs regardless of prior purchases of the other products
    • A negative experience will seemingly override all prior positive exchanges in  terms of brand-line value perception
      • This is validated through neuropsychological studies such as the third one cited above
  • This is based on repeated validation through the many Harvard Business Review case studies I've done.  I can attach sources upon request

 

And this is why I conclude that the price is too high for the bag slot expansion.  I've explained before that it is financially irresponsible for ArenaNet to change the product to an account wide product.