why is there no solo end-game content?

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

39 minutes ago, Linken.6345 said:

Yes and 90% of what we get are open world or content that can be soloed so abit more focus on group content would be nice.

So I do sympathise with that position.  However, the problem is that of that 90% open world/solo content, basically none of it is challenging.  There is basically:

 

90% Easy Open World/Story

5% Challenging group content

3% WvW

2% PvP

 

(These are fairly random number, obviously, but roughly sense of what seems to get attention)

 

That 5% of group content is way more than there is challenging solo content, and also more focussed on than both WvW and PvP.  If you want anything with challenge, group content is easily the best treated in recent years.  Solo players have pretty much nothing challenging (and we keep getting told to either play modes that weren't designed for solo, or just go play something else).

[kharmin.7683]

3 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

So I do sympathise with that position.  However, the problem is that of that 90% open world/solo content, basically none of it is challenging.  There is basically:

 

90% Easy Open World/Story

5% Challenging group content

3% WvW

2% PvP

 

(These are fairly random number, obviously, but roughly sense of what seems to get attention)

 

That 5% of group content is way more than there is challenging solo content, and also more focussed on than both WvW and PvP.  If you want anything with challenge, group content is easily the best treated in recent years.  Solo players have pretty much nothing challenging (and we keep getting told to either play modes that weren't designed for solo, or just go play something else).

I'd argue that these proportions are not a "problem".  Anet has the metrics and knows what makes the most money for them.  It would be a bad business decision to move away from a working formula.

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

36 minutes ago, kharmin.7683 said:

I'd argue that these proportions are not a "problem".  Anet has the metrics and knows what makes the most money for them.  It would be a bad business decision to move away from a working formula.

I think upping the challenging and rewarding solo content from "zero" would be good.  I'm not saying mess too much with the proportions, but I think veterans who aren't into group content (or have schedules that mean they can't do it much) would benefit from at least something.  I also suspect there is a bigger proportion of those players than there are say, sPvP players at this point, though that's only a hunch.

[Sobx.1758]

On 10/1/2022 at 12:27 AM, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

I think upping the challenging and rewarding solo content from "zero" would be good.  I'm not saying mess too much with the proportions, but I think veterans who aren't into group content (or have schedules that mean they can't do it much) would benefit from at least something.  I also suspect there is a bigger proportion of those players than there are say, sPvP players at this point, though that's only a hunch.

It's not "zero" and it was already pointed out to you many times.

[valentinium.7065]

On 9/25/2022 at 11:46 PM, RagiNagi.1802 said:

Hi,

 

Pretty much as the title says. I would like to play my toons and learn their mechanics, however, only place to reliably do so solo is golem 😄

It is a bit odd to me that all the end game content - Fracs, Raids, Strikes requires you to get the party of 5-10 people. And when you do, you mostly stack and don't even see your character and such.

Raids have a high entry barrier due to high skill floor and everyone wants experienced people. Way around this is getting a guild or friends that do this with  you, but that also requires time committent from everyone.

Fractals have high entry barrier in gear. If you want to play high tier fractals you need to have ascended gear with agonies. That costs money and time to acquire. How the heck should I decide whether I want to gear up my a new prof or not.

Open world is fine, but it is always so much zergining that it's doesn't feel like you need to express much skill as you can mostly afk with autoattacks.

 

Only thing which is pretty much plug and play is PvP. And that is cool, but rewards seem to be on the lower tier 😄

 

Is it only me who sees some opportunities here for new content. Or are you all fine with what end-game content you have available?

 

Cheers.

 

 

That's why I quit the game. I would pay a lot of money for this beauty though. Because I was passionately attached to it. But the endgame content just couldn't satisfy me for a solo player who hates being at parties. 

[yoni.7015]

1 hour ago, valentinium.7065 said:

That's why I quit the game. I would pay a lot of money for this beauty though. Because I was passionately attached to it. But the endgame content just couldn't satisfy me for a solo player who hates being at parties. 

Maybe try a single player game. But there is a lot to do in guild wars 2 for solo players. 

Edited January 4, 2023 by yoni.7015

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

1 hour ago, yoni.7015 said:

Maybe try a single player game. But there is a lot to do in guild wars 2 for solo players. 

Or, for a very small amount of development work (by simply adding solo strikes, using existing solo mechanics with some difficulty tweaks), the game could attract/keep more players.

 

Why send people who are likely to wind up putting money into the game away?

[Linken.6345]

10 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Or, for a very small amount of development work (by simply adding solo strikes, using existing solo mechanics with some difficulty tweaks), the game could attract/keep more players.

 

Why send people who are likely to wind up putting money into the game away?

We already beaten this horse to death mate.

[Silent.6137]

8 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Or, for a very small amount of development work (by simply adding solo strikes, using existing solo mechanics with some difficulty tweaks), the game could attract/keep more players.

 

Why send people who are likely to wind up putting money into the game away?

How many will actually do those? If just a small number are interested, the amount of development funds to create them will far surpasses any small amount these few players will spend. You can already do many Instanced contents solo since they are scaled to number of players.

[yoni.7015]

25 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Or, for a very small amount of development work (by simply adding solo strikes, using existing solo mechanics with some difficulty tweaks), the game could attract/keep more players.

 

Why send people who are likely to wind up putting money into the game away?

You want solo strikes? Play the story. No need to waste resources on this. 

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

14 hours ago, yoni.7015 said:

You want solo strikes? Play the story. No need to waste resources on this. 

The story mode is (1) not difficult, (2) not rewarding, and (3) not quickly accessible or playable.  This is not a good alternative.

14 hours ago, Silent.6137 said:

How many will actually do those? If just a small number are interested, the amount of development funds to create them will far surpasses any small amount these few players will spend. You can already do many Instanced contents solo since they are scaled to number of players.

In terms of how many people would play it, obviously that data is hard to get.  I can confidently say "At least one", being myself.  However, as has been noted, this topic is discussed a lot, so clearly there is interest.  Similarly, we can look at the success of one player games, especially difficult ones like the Souls series and Elden Ring, to show that there is a market for this kind of gameplay. 

 

Similarly, we know that the most experienced (in terms of time since creating account) players of GW2 have been here for ten years, and therefore due to age are likely to have commitments and responsibilities that make committing to a time or finding a group of ten players who are willing to let them practice difficult.  So there is an existing player base, of some size, for whom quickly accessible and low commitment content will be appealing.  I know I've logged in plenty of times looking for something quick to do, but nothing in the LFG fit the bill, so I've wound up doing very little and logging out.

 

We also know that Open World (read, playable solo) content is hugely popular within the GW2 community.  I believe, though I can't justify that with stats, much moreso than instanced group content.  So the players are already there.

 

I know there's a very vocal proportion of this forum that opposes the existence of this, but at least anecdotally, I don't think that reflects the community at large, and at the very least, doesn't prove their isn't a profitable market for this content.

Edited January 5, 2023 by CrashTestAuto.9108

[yoni.7015]

7 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

quickly accessible and low commitment content

We already have that, this is exactly what Strike missions are. 

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

29 minutes ago, yoni.7015 said:

We already have that, this is exactly what Strike missions are. 

Not at all times, and certainly not if you want to practice new classes or Challenge Modes (or even the more difficult normal modes).  Sure you can hop into the easy ones relatively quickly and easily (at least the IBS ones, EoD is more hit and miss), but that doesn't help with there being difficult content available.

 

I understand you don't want this.  I do not understand why you don't want people who do want it to have it.  Unless you think you represent a group of people who are so large and so committed to others not having this that you would stop playing yourself, then I also don't know why ANet should really weigh your opposition into a decision.  This isn't like people asking for a solo-expansion, or even a ground up solo raid or strike.  The resource investment is (unless there's a glaring issue I'm not aware of) really trivial, so this barely impacts you at all.

[Sobx.1758]

45 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

The story mode is (1) not difficult, (2) not rewarding, and (3) not quickly accessible or playable.  This is not a good alternative.

In terms of how many people would play it, obviously that data is hard to get.  I can confidently say "At least one", being myself.  However, as has been noted, this topic is discussed a lot, so clearly there is interest.  Similarly, we can look at the success of one player games, especially difficult ones like the Souls series and Elden Ring, to show that there is a market for this kind of gameplay. 

 

Similarly, we know that the most experienced (in terms of time since creating account) players of GW2 have been here for ten years, and therefore due to age are likely to have commitments and responsibilities that make committing to a time or finding a group of ten players who are willing to let them practice difficult.  So there is an existing player base, of some size, for whom quickly accessible and low commitment content will be appealing.  I know I've logged in plenty of times looking for something quick to do, but nothing in the LFG fit the bill, so I've wound up doing very little and logging out.

 

We also know that Open World (read, playable solo) content is hugely popular within the GW2 community.  I believe, though I can't justify that with stats, much moreso than instanced group content.  So the players are already there.

 

I know there's a very vocal proportion of this forum that opposes the existence of this, but at least anecdotally, I don't think that reflects the community at large, and at the very least, doesn't prove their isn't a profitable market for this content.

This is nothing new being said about it, so why do you feel the need to suddenly repeat the whole comment chain? There's already harder soloable content you can do if that's what you want. It was listed on the previous pages, just go back re-read the thread you're currently in. A lot of those responses were also given directly to you, so why are you repetaing what was already said -and subsequently responded to- anyways?

And things like strikes, fractals, dungeons or drms all are quickly accessed.

2 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Not at all times, and certainly not if you want to practice new classes

What does "wanting to practice new classes" have to do with access to content? Whether you're playing something for the 1st time or 200th time, the content is accessed in the same manner.

Edited January 5, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

2 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

This is nothing new being said about it, so why do you feel the need to suddenly repeat the whole comment chain? There's already harder soloable content you can do if that's what you want. It was listed on the previous pages, just go back re-read the thread you're currently in. A lot of those responses were also given directly to you, so why are you repetaing what was already said -and subsequently responded to- anyways?

Not everyone on the forum has your commitment to rereading threads.  If you don't feel you're getting anything new out of this, no one is forcing you to participate.

 

Besides, I was responding to recent comments.  Why choose to question my responses rather than theirs?

Edited January 5, 2023 by CrashTestAuto.9108

[Sobx.1758]

15 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Not everyone on the forum has your commitment to rereading threads.

The point was that you know it because you were part of it. Those responses were -largely- given directly to you, so if you forgot about them, I'm informing you that you might as well re-read this very thread instead of regurgitating same comment chain for the next x pages that will end the same it already did.

1 hour ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

So there is an existing player base, of some size, for whom quickly accessible and low commitment content will be appealing.  I know I've logged in plenty of times looking for something quick to do, but nothing in the LFG fit the bill, so I've wound up doing very little and logging out.

 

We also know that Open World (read, playable solo) content is hugely popular within the GW2 community.  I believe, though I can't justify that with stats, much moreso than instanced group content.  So the players are already there.

OW, trying out builds, quickly accessed, low commitment, has rewards... Do bounties I guess.

Edited January 5, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[yoni.7015]

5 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

I understand you don't want this.  I do not understand why you don't want people who do want it to have it.  Unless you think you represent a group of people who are so large and so committed to others not having this that you would stop playing yourself, then I also don't know why ANet should really weigh your opposition into a decision.  This isn't like people asking for a solo-expansion, or even a ground up solo raid or strike.  The resource investment is (unless there's a glaring issue I'm not aware of) really trivial, so this barely impacts you at all.

Like I wrote before, it’s a waste of resources in my opinion. Anet doesn’t have endless resources and they can’t do everything. There are more important things they should be working on. alliance system, new strike missions, new story, new fractals and new raid wing. They should not waste resources on solo strike missions, especially since we already have them in the story, you can easily replay them. 

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

17 minutes ago, yoni.7015 said:

Like I wrote before, it’s a waste of resources in my opinion. Anet doesn’t have endless resources and they can’t do everything. There are more important things they should be working on. alliance system, new strike missions, new story, new fractals and new raid wing. They should not waste resources on solo strike missions, especially since we already have them in the story, you can easily replay them. 

We already have strike missions, we already have story, we already have fractals, and we already have raid wings.  You can also go replay those.

 

The story missions obviously aren't the same as solo strikes, so even if the above made sense as an argument (which, to be clear, I really don't think it does), it wouldn't apply here.

 

On resources, there is no need for new assets, possibly no need for new rewards (maybe new achieves/titles), and very little need for new mechanics.  Everything is basically in he game already, as you said, just not in a difficult/rewarding/easily accessible fashion.  Comparing adding solo strike missions to designing a new raid is like comparing decorating a room to building a house.

 

 

I do also think they should be working on the things you listed.  Except possibly raids. I'd like a Wing 8, but really not sure if the audience is there to justify it.

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

25 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

The point was that you know it because you were part of it. Those responses were -largely- given directly to you, so if you forgot about them, I'm informing you that you might as well re-read this very thread instead of regurgitating same comment chain for the next x pages that will end the same it already did.

OW, trying out builds, quickly accessed, low commitment, has rewards... Do bounties I guess.

Yes, but those responses obviously didn't convince me, so re-reading them isn't a good use of my time.  Specifically they tended to do what you do here, and suggest playing something else (either Open World, which obviously everyone asking for solo endgame content knows exists, and it isn't addressing their concern), or another game entirely.

 

And again, I was responding to responses.  You just chose to address me specifically for some reason.

 

Anyway, as you've noted, we've had this conversation before, and it was unproductive.  Therefore you can assume any posts I'm making here are not directed at you (unless I'm quoting you), and you don't need to worry about them.  It just tends to derail threads otherwise, which hopefully isn't your intention.

[yoni.7015]

6 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Everything is basically in he game already, as you said, just not in a difficult/rewarding/easily accessible fashion.

Strike missions are just that, sometimes difficult, rewarding and easily accessible. We don’t need strike missions to be for solo players, they are meant as group content. 
This discussion leads nowhere 

Edited January 5, 2023 by yoni.7015

[Schimmi.6872]

2 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

We already have strike missions, we already have story, we already have fractals, and we already have raid wings.  You can also go replay those.

 

The story missions obviously aren't the same as solo strikes, so even if the above made sense as an argument (which, to be clear, I really don't think it does), it wouldn't apply here.

 

On resources, there is no need for new assets, possibly no need for new rewards (maybe new achieves/titles), and very little need for new mechanics.  Everything is basically in he game already, as you said, just not in a difficult/rewarding/easily accessible fashion.  Comparing adding solo strike missions to designing a new raid is like comparing decorating a room to building a house.

 

 

I do also think they should be working on the things you listed.  Except possibly raids. I'd like a Wing 8, but really not sure if the audience is there to justify it.

The problem is, that even if the assets etc. already exist, a lot of mechanics from strikes and raids would just not work or be useless in solo-modes. So I don't think that it will be as trivial as you think, to convert raids and strikes into endgame-solo-content.

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

10 minutes ago, yoni.7015 said:

Strike missions are just that, sometimes difficult, rewarding and easily accessible. We don’t need strike missions to be for solo players, they are meant as group content. 

I'm  not sure you can equate "I don't want X" with "We don't need X" so easily.  I know you don't want solo strikes. Others do.

 

11 minutes ago, yoni.7015 said:

This discussion leads nowhere 

I agree, let's you and I stop discussing this directly.

[yoni.7015]

1 minute ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Others do.

You mean you want this. You have brought up this idea of solo strikes several times before, not very successfully. 

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

9 minutes ago, Schimmi.6872 said:

The problem is, that even if the assets etc. already exist, a lot of mechanics from strikes and raids would just not work or be useless in solo-modes. So I don't think that it will be as trivial as you think, to convert raids and strikes into endgame-solo-content.

I totally agree for raids.  But strikes are based on story missions, which are already soloable.  The amount of effort is scalable depending on how much work it would actually take and the perceived benefit (e.g. you could literally just copy paste the story missions to a strike format, or you could adjust numbers to e.g. damage and health, or you could actually add new/group/CM mechanics).  Rewards could then also be scaled accordingly. 

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

1 minute ago, yoni.7015 said:

You mean you want this. You have brought up this idea of solo strikes several times before, not very successfully. 

 

17 minutes ago, yoni.7015 said:

This discussion leads nowhere 

 

4 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

I agree, let's you and I stop discussing this directly.