Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Anet needs to move away from Open World design and make new dungeons.


Recommended Posts

On 12/24/2021 at 1:25 AM, Redfeather.6401 said:

Anet needs to quit thinking they can make an mmorpg that even comes close to the top 5. They just don't get it.

edit: And now I am thinking someone reading this has no clue that gw2 is not in the top 5 played mmoprgs because of how much fanboyism dominates the mindset. Wow, FF, NW, ESO, BDO, RS, L. Those are the top 7.

But ESO was roughly in the same place as Anet until the released a console version.  And BDO I'm not convinced is in a better place. I'm not sure why you think so. Lineage failed in the west altogether if that's what your L stands for.   And this is a Western game. I wonder if you look at successful Western MMOs, that is how successful they are in the West, you'd have the same list. 


Guild Wars 2 was in the top five for a long long time. Imagine putting a game that's a few months old on that list like New World. It might be in the top 5 in 9 years and it might not exist at all.  Plenty of games fall by the wayside over time.

Edited by Vayne.8563
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 387
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I recently came back to the game because I'm heavily invested in it and wanted to experience Cantha when EoD hits...   However upon doing HoT, Pof and LS the maps are just as painful as I re

No thanks. If your focus is instanced group content, there are plenty of other games out there that focus on that kind of content.   The strength of GW2 is its focus on open world content. M

I love these threads, they make me feel like some sort of MMO God, when in reality nothing could be further from the truth. I have a dozen characters of assorted builds that have all successfully mapp

11 hours ago, Tails.9372 said:

No you didn't and even if you did it wouldn't have mattered because as you just admitted OW content offers a variety you don't want to see in non-story instanced content and it's getting rather sad seeing you tap-danceing around actually coming up with a reason to justify your position here.

Sure there is, you just don't seem to be able to comprehend that people are capable to call out issues they themselves are not suffering from so you come up with baseless nonsense like "you don't seem to like that there's content that's harder, for those that want it" in spite of the fact that in the very post you were replying to I even argued for the existence of such content.

No?  The instanced content isn't all the same either.  Different bosses, different mechanics, different layouts, lots of variety.  Fractals have 4 tiers, and are different from dungeons, and then there's raids.  I specifically used OW because that's what you would relate to, right?  By your own admission, you don't play the content, so you wouldn't know.  The thing is, they are part of the variety of content available.  Not all the content is for everyone, and it doesn't have to be.

Nowhere have I stated, or implied, that they shouldn't make more content, and apparently, they are, for those that are looking for more challenging gameplay.  I have said they could throw that part of the community a bone, however.  I don't agree with the basic premise of the thread, that they should shift their focus to that content.  I'm not convinced that it's what keeps the lights on, based on almost 4 years of reading these forums, and almost 2 decades in MMOs in general.

Then there's the big pink elephant in the room:  If you 're fine with the existence of this content, why try to deride ANet's design philosophy behind it?  You spend a lot of time deflecting away from addressing this by assigning motive to my posts, but it doesn't change the fact that you stated that this content's philosophy was a problem.  I have even provided the post again, so that you could address it.  The answer was along the lines of, "But the game suffers for the lack of variety".  This is objectively false, but hey, it's easier to assign motive to me, right?   A good example is the first paragraph in the post I quoted here.  Unless, of course, you mean that because I don't think it needs an EZ Mode, I'm against variety?

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I know our capitalist system idolizes maximizing market share. The general assumption is that a company should strive to capture the largest portion of a market they can. Within that framework, nothing short of largest customer base is considered the best, and less than top 5 is considered outright failure.

I'm fascinated by the idea of Seth Godin's minimum viable audience, though. What happens if, instead of trying to satisfy the largest number of people possible, a company sets itself to truly satisfy the smallest possible number of customers needed for the business to thrive?

Instead of aiming at a false middle that truly satisfies no one but keeps a half-hearted audience grudgingly buying, they could hone a product to be the absolute best option for whatever group they have specifically targeted.

GW2 doesn't have to be in the top 3 or top 5 or whatever list as long as it can satisfy enough people to keep the game at a healthy population, healthy income, and staff that are excited to keep creating and serving that audience.

Whether that is happening or not is beyond what I know, and people may have evidence for or against. But I have to challenge the idea that "isn't among the largest" is equivalent to "is a failure". That's a myth of our globalist capitalist system.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

No?

Yes.

4 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

The instanced content isn't all the same either.  Different bosses, different mechanics, different layouts, lots of variety.

And they are all, by your own admission, designed to be of higher difficulty to appeal to those that are looking for a challenge.

4 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

By your own admission, you don't play the content, so you wouldn't know.

Quote me the part where I said I don't... oh wait you can't because I never did. Once again your words from earlier come to mind here:

On 12/25/2021 at 1:22 PM, robertthebard.8150 said:

It's really easy to defeat arguments that you make up in a post, but let's talk about what I said, instead of what you want me to have said.  Sound fair?  Excellent.

You really should listen to your own advice more.

4 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

Nowhere have I stated, or implied, that they shouldn't make more content, and apparently, they are, for those that are looking for more challenging gameplay.

Nowhere have I stated, or implied, that you said they shouldn't make more content, and apparently, they are, for those that are looking for more challenging gameplay.

4 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

Then there's the big pink elephant in the room:  If you 're fine with the existence of this content, why try to deride ANet's design philosophy behind it?

Now you're just comparing apples to oranges:

having non-story instanced content designed for those that are "looking for a challenge " ≠ designing all non-story instanced content only for that sub-group of the player base

4 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

You spend a lot of time deflecting away from addressing this

What are you talking about? You just never asked, not that there would have been any need to since I've been pretty upfront about the fact that this is about increasing content diversity in areas where the game is still lacking.

But speaking of "deflecting away from addressing" something, you still haven't justified what I called you out on earlier.

4 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

by assigning motive to my posts

I wasn't assigning anything to your posts, you yourself did that. Also this is another one of these things you're guilty of yourself as your previous reply to me was essentially just that.

4 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

Unless, of course, you mean that because I don't think it needs...

No, you don't just think it doesn't need (which in and of itself is one of the emptiest reasons for taking opposition to anything) but you explicitly stated that it shouldn't (ofc. with no explanation given as for why).

4 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

I'm against variety?

By your own admission you are:

Fine with challenging open world content for those that are looking for it.
Fine with easy open world content for those that are looking for it.
Fine with challenging non-story instanced content for those that are looking for it.
Against easy non-story instanced content for those that are looking for it.

So yes, in regards to the last point, you are against variety.

Edited by Tails.9372
  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

That's what strikes will be for.

Yeah, they could do other stuff to.  Whether they will or not is another issue.

9 minutes ago, Tails.9372 said:

Yes.

And they are all, by your own admission, designed to be of higher difficulty to appeal to those that are looking for a challenge.

Quote me the part where I said I don't... oh wait you can't because I never did. Once again your words from earlier come to mind here:

You really should listen to your own advice more.

Nowhere have I stated, or implied, that you said they shouldn't make more content, and apparently, they are, for those that are looking for more challenging gameplay.

Now you're just comparing apples to oranges:

having non-story instanced content designed for those that are "looking for a challenge " ≠ designing all non-story instanced content only for that sub-group of the player base

What are you talking about? You just never asked, not that there would have been any need to since I've been pretty upfront about the fact that this is about increasing content diversity in areas where the game is still lacking.

But speaking of "deflecting away from addressing" something, you still haven't justified what I called you out on earlier.

I wasn't assigning anything to your posts, you yourself did that. Also this is another one of these things you're guilty of yourself as your previous reply to me was essentially just that.

No, you don't just think it doesn't need (which in and of itself is one of the emptiest reasons for taking opposition to anything) but you explicitly stated that it shouldn't (ofc. with no explanation given as for why).

By your own admission you are:

Fine with challenging open world content for those that are looking for it.
Fine with easy open world content for those that are looking for it.
Fine with challenging non-story instanced content for those that are looking for it.
Aggainst easy non-story instanced content for those that are looking for it.

So yes, in regards to the last point, you are against variety.

I can't even begin to imagine the level of mental gymnastics required to get to that last statement.

Dungeons are unique unto themselves, and thus add variety to what's available for the population of the game.

Fractals are unique unto themselves, and thus also add to the variety of content for the population.

Raids are unique unto themselves, and thus add to the variety of content available to the community.

There sure seems to be a lot of variety available, for a game that's suffering from the lack of variety, yes?  That it's harder than the base OW content is part of what makes it unique, adds to the variety of content available and is why it exists.  If you have any doubts about that, check out the thread title where you're arguing that there's no variety in the game, it's looking for even more of that content.

But yes, I am fine with the wide variety of content that is available in a game that, according to you, is suffering from a lack of variety in it's content.  I mean, we even left out PvP and WvW for people that are interested in that, and yet, it's also available, for those that want it.  So, again, where's the suffering?

  • Like 5
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

Yeah, they could do other stuff to.  Whether they will or not is another issue.

I can't even begin to imagine the level of mental gymnastics required to get to that last statement.

Dungeons are unique unto themselves, and thus add variety to what's available for the population of the game.

Fractals are unique unto themselves, and thus also add to the variety of content for the population.

Raids are unique unto themselves, and thus add to the variety of content available to the community.

There sure seems to be a lot of variety available, for a game that's suffering from the lack of variety, yes?  That it's harder than the base OW content is part of what makes it unique, adds to the variety of content available and is why it exists.  If you have any doubts about that, check out the thread title where you're arguing that there's no variety in the game, it's looking for even more of that content.

But yes, I am fine with the wide variety of content that is available in a game that, according to you, is suffering from a lack of variety in it's content.  I mean, we even left out PvP and WvW for people that are interested in that, and yet, it's also available, for those that want it.  So, again, where's the suffering?

When was the last raid released?  The last fractal? The last dungeon?  How many years did WvW and PvP go with almost zero development?  That's the problem.  What keeps MMO players paying and playing is the variety of new content.  You wouldn't say we don't need new open world/story content because we already have a variety of it, would you?

  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

When was the last raid released?  The last fractal? The last dungeon?  How many years did WvW and PvP go with almost zero development?  That's the problem.  What keeps MMO players paying and playing is the variety of new content.  You wouldn't say we don't need new open world/story content because we already have a variety of it, would you?

Every balance patch matters for WvW & PvP, so never? Just like in regular PvP games like CSGO, LoL etc. balance is the thing that matters most. New gamemodes rarely matter, LoL had dominion which failed, GW2 had stronghold etc.

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Release

Chronologically, since you've been asking about last "type of content" release, it would be:

Last Dungeon (instanced): dungeons are discontinued, Aetherpath, October 1, 2013
Last Raid (instanced): Ahdashim, June 11, 2019
Last Strike Mission (instanced): Cold War, May 26, 2020
Last Open World map (open world): Northern part of Drizzlewood (1/2 map), July 28, 2020
Last Fractal (instanced): Sunqua Peak, September 15, 2020
Last DRM (instanced): March 9, 2021
Last Wold Boss (instanced): Dragonstorm, April 27, 2021
Last Story (instanced): Dragonstorm + Champion's End, April 27, 2021
Last Festival (open world + instanced): Wintersday: December 14, 2021

I'd say there's more instanced variety than open world variety in the last releases. It has been over more than a year for the last non-festival open world release, while instanced content has released this very year.

But in the end Anet has to decide what content they release to keep the game running. They have the stats what content is being run by the community & what content brings in the money.

Edited by Raknar.4735
  • Like 3
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

I can't even begin to imagine the level of mental gymnastics required to get to that last statement.

Hey that's my line!

But as predicted you failed to actually refute anything I said / to back up any of your claims of what I supposedly "admitted to".

22 minutes ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

There sure seems to be a lot of variety available, for a game that's suffering from the lack of variety, yes?

Another example of your disingenuous mental gymnastics. I explicitly stated in what regard the game is lacking content variety. If you can't refute that then you have no point here.

26 minutes ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

That it's harder than the base OW content is part of what makes it unique, adds to the variety of content available

The sheer fact that it's harder than "base OW content" adds nothing to content variety whatsoever. Also, "being unique" by itself is not a desirable quality to have. If all non-story instanced content would be as easy as your average core game OW content then, in that regard, it would also be "unique" but the same issue would still apply.

  • Confused 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Raknar.4735 said:

Every balance patch matters for WvW & PvP, so never? Just like in regular PvP games like CSGO, LoL etc. balance is the thing that matters most. New gamemodes rarely matter, LoL had dominion which failed, GW2 had stronghold etc.

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Release

Chronologically, since you've been asking about last "type of content" release, it would be:

Last Dungeon (instanced): dungeons are discontinued, Aetherpath, October 1, 2013
Last Raid (instanced): Ahdashim, June 11, 2019
Last Strike Mission (instanced): Cold War, May 26, 2020
Last Open World map (open world): Northern part of Drizzlewood, July 28, 2020
Last Fractal (instanced): Sunqua Peak, September 15, 2020
Last DRM (instanced): March 9, 2021
Last Wold Boss (instanced): Dragonstorm, April 27, 2021
Last Story (instanced): Dragonstorm + Champion's End, April 27, 2021
Last Festival (open world + instanced): Wintersday: December 14, 2021

I'd say there's more instanced variety than open world variety in the last releases.

It's been nearly 2 years since the last big competitive balance patch, which came along with a promise to focus on regular competitive balancing moving forward.  Broken promises are a consistent feature of this "well-managed" product, too.

Also, while I'm not necessarily suggesting it, I do want to point out that just because GW2's couple of attempts to produce new competitive games were failures doesn't mean it's inherently a bad idea.  WoW's battlegrounds are a good example of making that work.

On PvE content.  DRMs are instanced, yes, but they are story content designed for solo play and should not be included with fractals/dungeons/raids/strikes.  Dungeons and raids are both now unsupported content that haven't released anything new in years.  Of the currently supported instanced group PvE content, neither strikes nor fractals have released anything new in well over a year.  

In short, I disagree that this variety of content is being supported.  I think it's pretty clear that open world/story is the focus and while I think that's a safe bet, I feel they could stand to put more effort into these other types of content.  I think it would be good for the game.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

It's been nearly 2 years since the last big competitive balance patch, which came along with a promise to focus on regular competitive balancing moving forward.  Broken promises are a consistent feature of this "well-managed" product, too.

Also, while I'm not necessarily suggesting it, I do want to point out that just because GW2's couple of attempts to produce new competitive games were failures doesn't mean it's inherently a bad idea.  WoW's battlegrounds are a good example of making that work.

On PvE content.  DRMs are instanced, yes, but they are story content designed for solo play and should not be included with fractals/dungeons/raids/strikes.  Dungeons and raids are both now unsupported content that haven't released anything new in years.  Of the currently supported instanced group PvE content, neither strikes nor fractals have released anything new in well over a year.  

In short, I disagree that this variety of content is being supported.  I think it's pretty clear that open world/story is the focus and while I think that's a safe bet, I feel they could stand to put more effort into these other types of content.  I think it would be good for the game.

Oh I agree with the battleground idea. Anet should definately add more, less competitive maps and gamemodes to the game. SPvP & Arena style PvP isn't for everyone.
Still, a game that focuses on PvP like LoL and CSGO etc. mostly focus on their main gamemode, as they're more competitve games and therefore focus more on balance. They don't add new gamemodes (aside from event gamemodes only playable during a respective event for a short duration). So you either focus on more modes or on competitivity. WoW does the former, PvP games do the latter. That's also the reason there's no actual mechanic balancing for ARAM, a gamemode in LoL, aside from global % damage increases and reductions.

DRM's aren't designed for solo play. They just scale to a solo player. They're designed as 1-5 player instanced content. So they should be inluded with fractals/dungeons/raids/strikes, as they are also instanced group content. Of course, you can subjectively discredit them, but that's just your opinion.

Also, an open world map has also not been released in well over a year. In fact, from the content types you list, the full fractal release has been more recent than the 1/2 open world map release. Then comes the whole DRM stuff & Dragonstorm + Marionette comeback and i'd say instanced content has been plenty supported relative to OW content for the last year.

I'm sure Anet does focus on the content that their stats favour. If they put more effort into types of content that don't get played and therefore don't return profit so that the game can no longer be developed, I think it would be bad for the game.

For EoD that content seems to be open world and more accessible strike missions for now.

Edited by Raknar.4735
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Tails.9372 said:

They never said anything about wanting to make strikes more accessible.

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/guild-wars-2-end-of-dragons-strike-missions/

"Accessible Endgame

Normal difficulty Strike Missions are intended to be an entry point into the world of 10-player content in Guild Wars 2. These instances are designed to be something you can tackle alongside both close friends and new allies, pitting you and nine others against jazzed-up, remixed versions of epic, exciting bosses from the Guild Wars 2: End of Dragons story. This gives every player the opportunity to experience these encounters as key story moments, while enabling each Strike Mission to hold greater importance in the overall narrative. These encounters will introduce you to the mechanics you’ll need to learn and master in order to continue your journey, in an environment that doesn’t demand perfection but still pushes you to learn and grow your combat capabilities.

By the time you’ve completed each Strike Mission, you’ll be familiar with encounter terms like fixates, stack and spread, kiting, and more. Our goal is that once you’ve got a firm grasp of the fundamentals, you should feel confident tackling the next steps on the difficulty ladder, including a much-requested addition to Strike Missions…"

 

From their second paragraph, it seems that the intention with the new EoD strike missions is to let players get a firm grasp of the fundamentals and to get players familiar with basic tactics like fixates, stack and spread, kiting, and more.

So it seems they will be more accessible than something like boneskinner & Whisper where players are just thrown in without knowing anything about instanced group play.

Also, it seems that we'll fight the same bosses players will already have seen in the story. So their general mechanics will probably stay the same, with a few mechanical changes here and there. Players will already know parts of the bosses designs, as they'd have successfully beat them in the story.

 

Edited by Raknar.4735
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Raknar.4735 said:

From their second paragraph, it seems that the intention with the new EoD strike missions is to let players get a firm grasp of the fundamentals and to get players familiar with basic tactics like fixates, stack and spread, kiting, and more.

That has always been the case, nothing about what they said about "normal" SMs in EoD stands in contrast to their original intent. They're merly reiterating their original statements about how they are intended to be the stepping stone for more difficult content. The only thing thats actually new here is the challenge mode with "raid difficulty".

11 minutes ago, Raknar.4735 said:

Also, it seems that we'll fight the same bosses players will already have seen in the story.

That's not a new concept, the boss fight in Shiverpeaks Pass is also just an upgraded version of the related story boss.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Tails.9372 said:

That has always been the case, nothing about what they said about "normal" SMs in EoD stands in contrast to their original intent. They're merly reiterating their original statements about how they are intended to be the stepping stone for more difficult content. The only thing thats actually new here is the challenge mode with "raid difficulty".

They've never mentioned anything about SMs specifically giving the players a firm grasp of the fundamentals and to get players familiar with basic tactics like fixates, stack and spread, kiting, and more during any of the IBS SM releases. Feel free to correct me with a source.

In fact, it seems to be what EoD is about: Teaching new players how to play the game. They've even set up a new training space on Shing Jea. So it shouldn't come as a surprise that the new SMs will be more about training the players, instead of just throwing players into SMs like boneskinner and whisper.

25 minutes ago, Tails.9372 said:

That's not a new concept, the boss fight in Shiverpeaks Pass is also just an upgraded version of the related story boss.

If by "upgraded version" you mean completely new mechanics, with the only resemblance being the look and basic attacks, then yes.
The same has been done for Whisper and Fraenir, where the story version in no way resembles the Strike fight.

I doubt this is what they meant in their blog, as every single SM is also a story boss, from what we've been told.

Edited by Raknar.4735
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

When was the last raid released?  The last fractal? The last dungeon?  How many years did WvW and PvP go with almost zero development?  That's the problem.  What keeps MMO players paying and playing is the variety of new content.  You wouldn't say we don't need new open world/story content because we already have a variety of it, would you?

...and what part of "they could throw that community a bone" or "they could do more" means I'm saying we don't need anything new?  That I don't think they need to change their focus?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tails.9372 said:

Hey that's my line!

But as predicted you failed to actually refute anything I said / to back up any of your claims of what I supposedly "admitted to".

Another example of your disingenuous mental gymnastics. I explicitly stated in what regard the game is lacking content variety. If you can't refute that then you have no point here.

The sheer fact that it's harder than "base OW content" adds nothing to content variety whatsoever. Also, "being unique" by itself is not a desirable quality to have. If all non-story instanced content would be as easy as your average core game OW content then, in that regard, it would also be "unique" but the same issue would still apply.

Can't.  Stop.  Laughing.  🤣 🤣

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

So, basically a history of being poorly managed with a lot on the line in the immediate future?  Sounds about right.

 

This.  GW2 is the answer to the question how well would a mmo game do with a fun combat system,  great graphics, mostly open world content PvE content - but no gear treadmill and no holy trinity?

 

The answer is  - not that well.  Rather than being one of the big MMOs - its now a niche game.  Arenanet has tried to fix this in several ways.

 

Fractals gives players a "light" gear treadmill.   Ascended Armor is part of a light gear treadmill.  Arenanet has tried to introduce raids,  strike missions, dragon response missions to provide more challenging encounters.  They even tried to introduce difficult open world content like triple trouble and the marionette. 

 

The problem for Arenanet is that they were not aggressive enough with their fixes - and all those people that liked tried and true systems moved on.  To remedy this they need to show more commitment to the fixes - not less.  And this is the rationale behind the op advocating for a major shift.  I don't agree with that. We don't need a major shift. 

 

How about a decent amount of fractals, strike missions or raids to keep the more involved PvE player happy?

 

We already know what happens when they stick 100% with their initial vision.  The game will become even more niche and they will start to just give up on entire game modes.

 

Let's be real - fractals has been around forever now - and you can play through all of them really quickly.  PvE instanced content is not exactly coming fast and furious. 

 

From what we have seen of EoD they seem to be deemphasizing it - which might be a business decision - but it doesn't seem a like a positive one.  Perhaps they feel the best way to milk their existing niche player base is to focus on open world play.. and they have given up on being one of the big time players in the mmo world.

 

But I don't believe that is the case.  I am so old I remember when EQ went down the milk it path releasing around a dozen expansions which was fine. But also a clear signal they were not really interested in trying to compete with the big guys like WoW.

 

The real question is does Arenanet have ambition or are they content to just cater to the cosmetic grinder niche..?  

And BTW this is pretty much the same question that the PvP and WvW guys have been asking for the last 9 years as well..

  • Confused 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Raknar.4735 said:

They've never mentioned anything about SMs specifically giving the players a firm grasp of the fundamentals

They don't need to as that's already a given. Strikes would not be able to serve as a "stepping stone" if they're incapable of doing that.

54 minutes ago, Raknar.4735 said:

If by "upgraded version" you mean completely new mechanics, with the only resemblance being the look and basic attacks, then yes.

And that's exactly what they said EoD SMs are going to be: "remixed versions" of the story bosses with the goal to introduce the players to the new mechanics they "need to learn and master in order to continue their journey".

Edited by Tails.9372
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tails.9372 said:

They don't need to as that's already a given. Strikes would not be able to serve as a "stepping stone" if they're incapable of doing that.

So they didn't state it originally, so you're only assuming and

2 hours ago, Tails.9372 said:

 They're merly reiterating their original statements

was a lie. Thanks for clearing that up. Guess there just wasn't a source.

 

1 hour ago, Tails.9372 said:

And that's exactly what they said EoD SMs are going to be: "remixed versions" of the story bosses with the goal to introduce the players to the new mechanics they "need to learn and master in order to continue their journey".

Sure. Just like the fight against Dhuum is a "remixed version" of the fight against a ice worm in Snowden Drifts.
Dhuum merely has new mechanics they "need to learn and master" 🙄

W/e, seems pointless to have an actual discussion with you, as it seems you're just arguing to bait responses, just as you did with @robertthebard.8150. Not going to lose myself in a discussion against your assumptions. After all, we'll only have to wait 2 more months to see what the EoD Strike Missions will be like.

Edited by Raknar.4735
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Raknar.4735 said:

So they didn't state it originally, so you're only assuming and

5 hours ago, Tails.9372 said:

 They're merly reiterating their original statements

was a lie. Thanks for clearing that up.

Then show me where exactly I lied, with proof please. Looks like you're just assuming that to be dismissive but the issue here is that you could have easily figured out that, to give you the source, these statements came from their 7th Anniversary Announcement Event:

"And so what strike missions are are going to allow players to group-up up to ten people and take on challenging boss encounters, it's going to be introductory into raid content but without a lot of the stress. We heard all of you, it can be intimidating sometimes to get into that twitchy kind of content, that highly choreographed content so we want to introduce something thats going to be that stepping stone."

"Like another thing, just to mention this, from a design standpoint with this what strike missions allow us to do is to take creatures and bosses that we create in like the story and campaign most players only play once we get to take that, we get to tweak that, we get to modify that, put them in these strike missions and players can play that over and over again."

3 hours ago, Raknar.4735 said:

W/e, seems pointless to have an actual discussion with you, as it seems you're just arguing to bait responses, just as you did with @robertthebard.8150.

The last thing you quoted was me directly referencing official statements you bought up yourself earlier to which you just responded with denial so I agree that there seems to be no point in arguing with you any further, not because I "bait responses" (whatever that's supposed to mean) but because it looks like you just want to argue in bad faith.

Edited by Tails.9372
  • Confused 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Hume.2876 said:

 

This.  GW2 is the answer to the question how well would a mmo game do with a fun combat system,  great graphics, mostly open world content PvE content - but no gear treadmill and no holy trinity?

 

The answer is  - not that well.  Rather than being one of the big MMOs - its now a niche game.  

based on what measure? What data are you using to make this conclusion?

The ACTUAL answer is:  well enough to still be here serving its customers. Any guess about how well that is ... is just a guess. 

Quote

The real question is does Arenanet have ambition or are they content to just cater to the cosmetic grinder niche..?  

If the primary goal of the game was not to support a business, then sure, that would be the real the question. The REAL question is if the game is going to support a business that investors have their money in. If catering to the cosmetic grinder niche is what does that ... then there isn't an argument to be made for Anet not to do it. 

Edited by Obtena.7952
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...