Suggestion - World of Ruin

[Astralporing.1957]

Personally, i don't see the appeal.

On 9/28/2022 at 2:33 PM, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Add significantly to the game whilst keeping resourcing as low as possible.

I'm afraid you overestimate the "gain" to the game, and severely underestimate the resource costs of implementing that idea. And that's without even considering a negative impact of potentially splitting the playerbase even further (but we'd have to worry about that only if the mode ended up being significantly more popular than i think it would be).

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

14 minutes ago, Danikat.8537 said:

It absolutely could be done, and you're right that it would be less work than an entire expansion, although I'm not sure comparing it to the biggest releases the game gets is saying much.

The problem is the disproportionate trade-off between the effort involved and the appeal for players. An expansion is worth the time and effort for Anet because they can sell it to players, and they make sure to include at least some stuff which will appeal to everyone.

Whereas so far the most enthusiastic response this idea had gotten is a few people saying it might be an interesting novelty for a bit, but not something they expect to put a lot of time into. If most players aren't interested at all and the ones who are don't seem very enthusiastic it's very likely any effort Anet puts into making it would be wasted.

On that basis comparing it to making an expansion is like saying it would be less work for me to cook fried liver and onions tonight, instead of the curry I'm planning to make. No one who will be eating it likes liver and onions so it really doesn't matter how easy it is - better to spend more effort on something that will be enjoyed by the target audience.

For what it's worth I agree.

 

I'm fairly surprised that this wasn't at least interesting to a few people.  There are a lot of people on the forum (myself included) who want challenging content, but find grouping a pain.  This also isn't a particularly novel idea - RPGs have been doing "dark world" for ages.  Plus, I thought there'd be a reasonable amount of players nostalgic for old school map completion, but a bit burnt out on doing it over and over exactly the same.

 

I expected some pushback on "put resources elsewhere", and obviously the usual people shooting down all ideas.  But yeah, surprised there weren't at least a few people who thought this would be a good way to add some fresh content without having to build a load of new assets etc.

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

52 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

All of these "more challenging content"  or "more solo content" etc. recent threads all fail to address the core issues.

Core issue 1:

With recent power creep, unlike past power creep which was more about individual class performance, and the ready availability of boons for more players, a larger segment of the player base has come into the benefit of realizing just how easy this game actually is.

Core issue 2:

The gap in performance between players remains large due to the simple nature that the game is overall complex.

Core issue 3:

There is still a huge disparity between players willing to improve and learn which are going out and using outside resources (or even in-game resources like tool-tips or the damage golem), and those which do not. This disparity will never disappear or "get fixed".

 

So to every player that has recently realized how easy this game can be, now with even more boons, welcome to the club. This is where experienced players have been at for nearly 6 years and longer (the major push came with HoT and dedicated supports, before it was small segments of fractal runners and speed runners mostly).

You now get to be told that challenging content is not desirable, you are elitist and everyone should get to play how they want, no matter how inefficient or incompetent their build might be. Maybe there'll even be some epic meltdowns (remember DE? remember HoT on launch? etc) on the forums of players who can't read past their basic tool-tips. You get to experience it all now too.

 

TL;DR:

The developers, with their approach to lower the skill required to succeed at the game, have manged to get more players into decent performance territory across the board. While that is great news for class diversity and accessibility, it also comes with the now added benefit/detriment that some of those players will be just as bored in content as former "elitist".

My advice: suck it up and get comfy with being bored to tears in open world, because the skill gap to the worst players is still large enough and all of them "get to play how they want" after all too. That's what players who crave/enjoy a challenge got told for years and now you get the same answer.

I think you have some reasonable points here, but I don't agree with the pessimism.  Let's say you're right and that the devs have caught up a lot of players by lowering the skill floor (which they've been fairly explicit about being a goal of their changes).  That means that we're now approaching a point (which wasn't true a few years ago) where the number of players who hard content benefits might be big enough to justify resourcing.

 

The reason I'm suggesting something like this is that if there is a very casual crowd who need to also be kept happy, then something like "hard mode" makes sense.  Building entirely new maps will always require keeping the difficulty low because a lot of players just want story and exploration.  Difficult instanced content has been tried repeatedly and doesn't seem to be getting the traction the devs want.

 

I obviously, as many people have so politely pointed out, don't know the full development requirements that need to be balanced here.  Possibly a "hard mode character slot" would be a cheaper and better alternative.  I'm suggesting this because, to me at least, this would be more interesting and engaging.

[The Boz.2038]

How would a solo map instance keep a map popular, and why would that be relevant?

[kharmin.7683]

1 hour ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

I'm fairly surprised that this wasn't at least interesting to a few people. 

 

The forums represent a very small portion of the player base.  It may well be that more would find this interesting; they just don't visit the forums.

[Embered.5089]

Why are people now talking about this as an expac? The OP isn't asking for an expac. He's expecting this to be done outside of an expac, holiday, or any significant event. He's expecting something like a new gamemode, except that it's still open world and supposedly uses resources that already exist.

Even if he were to request it as the new expac, it doesn't qualify as one. GW2's expacs are not cheap copy-paste reused maps. An expac requires a lot more than redoing existing maps and adding random mobs and different loot. An expac has to take into account the story's continuation, a completely new functional feature (gliding, mounts, jade transport, fishing, skiffs, multiplayer mount), new areas and biomes, and everything associated with all of that. What the OP is asking for has nothing to do with a new expac.

@CrashTestAuto.9108 Re: Why the hostility?

Because, no matter what we say about Dark Tyria, you won't compromise. You unyieldingly defend your idea, as if compromise or a constructive discussion is not what you were looking for. It's almost as if you wanted your idea to be implemented exactly the way that it was presented, fully expecting all of us to agree. The most constructive thing that you've done is to scrap your idea and ask for a "hard mode character slot" instead.

Let's expand on this "hard mode character slot". I wouldn't be against it. However, my idea of it is probably very different from yours.

A "hard mode character slot" should focus on the character slot, not on changing Tyria. This means no changes to mob spawns, no changes to loot, no changes to maps. What would change is how that character in that slot works. For example, permanent death. Someone else said that they had a character slot reserved for perma-deaths. Tangent to this, a "hard mode character", once dead, may stay dead. If you die in a fight or jump off a cliff, the character may be reset back to just after creation. Then you'll have the option to either restart your character's adventure, or remake the character with a new class/race/etc. Other ideas include restricting hero points so that you have to carefully apply your points, reducing damage output and increasing damage taken, blocking LFG posting and party joining, and other changes that will make it harder for your character to fight and survive, without affecting anyone or anything else. This would provide the challenge that you're looking for, without requiring a massive world overhaul, and without affecting the players who are opposed to a hard mode. In fact, players who wouldn't play it could still use it as a free character slot to try out race/class/name fashion wars combos while remaining safely in a city. Even if one doesn't want to utilize the hard mode gameplay or participate in fashion wars, it would still be a free character slot, so many people could figure out ways to use it. I think that this is a better, wider-audience alternative to what you originally wanted.

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

26 minutes ago, Embered.5089 said:

Why are people now talking about this as an expac? The OP isn't asking for an expac. He's expecting this to be done outside of an expac, holiday, or any significant event. He's expecting something like a new gamemode, except that it's still open world and supposedly uses resources that already exist.

Even if he were to request it as the new expac, it doesn't qualify as one. GW2's expacs are not cheap copy-paste reused maps. An expac requires a lot more than redoing existing maps and adding random mobs and different loot. An expac has to take into account the story's continuation, a completely new functional feature (gliding, mounts, jade transport, fishing, skiffs, multiplayer mount), new areas and biomes, and everything associated with all of that. What the OP is asking for has nothing to do with a new expac.

@CrashTestAuto.9108 Re: Why the hostility?

Because, no matter what we say about Dark Tyria, you won't compromise. You unyieldingly defend your idea, as if compromise or a constructive discussion is not what you were looking for. It's almost as if you wanted your idea to be implemented exactly the way that it was presented, fully expecting all of us to agree. The most constructive thing that you've done is to scrap your idea and ask for a "hard mode character slot" instead.

Let's expand on this "hard mode character slot". I wouldn't be against it. However, my idea of it is probably very different from yours.

A "hard mode character slot" should focus on the character slot, not on changing Tyria. This means no changes to mob spawns, no changes to loot, no changes to maps. What would change is how that character in that slot works. For example, permanent death. Someone else said that they had a character slot reserved for perma-deaths. Tangent to this, a "hard mode character", once dead, may stay dead. If you die in a fight or jump off a cliff, the character may be reset back to just after creation. Then you'll have the option to either restart your character's adventure, or remake the character with a new class/race/etc. Other ideas include restricting hero points so that you have to carefully apply your points, reducing damage output and increasing damage taken, blocking LFG posting and party joining, and other changes that will make it harder for your character to fight and survive, without affecting anyone or anything else. This would provide the challenge that you're looking for, without requiring a massive world overhaul, and without affecting the players who are opposed to a hard mode. In fact, players who wouldn't play it could still use it as a free character slot to try out race/class/name fashion wars combos while remaining safely in a city. Even if one doesn't want to utilize the hard mode gameplay or participate in fashion wars, it would still be a free character slot, so many people could figure out ways to use it. I think that this is a better, wider-audience alternative to what you originally wanted.

Unyielding?  You made two posts before getting hostile, and the second of those was telling me to go and play other games..  Yes, I think this is a good idea (that's why I suggested it).  Obviously I'm not going to immediately throw my hands up at the first concerns raised.

 

On the other bits, you described basically exactly what I'd do with a hard mode slot.  Except I'd add more account bound rewards (skins/achievements), and make some more mechanical changes like disabling gliding and most waypoints, and maybe add some debuffs so that incoming damage and conditions are more punishing.

 

I'm not convinced that this would be more appealing broadly.  There's very little advertising potential, and also it isn't something people would dip in and out of (especially with permadeath).  Yes it's obviously cheaper to implement, but I'm not sure it would bring in as much potential as something like my original idea.

[Bladestrom.6425]

I don't agree with the need to have such a thing, but if we want hard mode open world then rather than trying to adapt the entire game world and split the population to meet some arbitrary power level it would be far far easier and cheaper to simply offer a hard mode option in  the settings.  If its selected then everything has x% more heath/power/reward.  If selected you get a permanent debuff

[Bladestrom.6425]

really not that confusing lol.

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

36 minutes ago, vesica tempestas.1563 said:

I don't agree with the need to have such a thing, but if we want hard mode open world then rather than trying to adapt the entire game world and split the population to meet some arbitrary power level it would be far far easier and cheaper to simply offer a hard mode option in  the settings.  If its selected then everything has x% more heath/power/reward.  If selected you get a permanent debuff

Yes, absolutely this would be far easier and cheaper to develop.  But it's also essentially the same as playing without gear.

 

The reason I put so much emphasis on the aesthetics, and the social media benefits, of this idea is because it is designed to actually attract players (based on the particular focus group on this forum, not successfully 😂).

 

No one is going to pick up the game because "We've added an option to nerf yourself!" even if in practice that's very similar to upping the difficulty.  It's like before raids came out saying "Just do Fractals without gear!"  Yes, that would make for harder content, but it isn't going to attract many people.

[Gryphon.2875]

It really doesn't fit in the current lore/story.

[god fragment.5716]

Here's an option that is already in the game: use lower tier equipment. Noone said you have to use ascended, exotic or even rare gear. Yes there is a lack of stat combinations in the lower tiers, but those can be viewed as extra chalanges to overcome.

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

18 minutes ago, Gryphon.2875 said:

It really doesn't fit in the current lore/story.

I confess I'm not an expert on the lore, but I'm not sure that's true.  This seems in keeping with the way the Mists work elsewhere, and I don't think it would take a lot of story writing to explain how the player can travel in and out of that version of Tyria.

[Gryphon.2875]

3 hours ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

I confess I'm not an expert on the lore, but I'm not sure that's true.  This seems in keeping with the way the Mists work elsewhere, and I don't think it would take a lot of story writing to explain how the player can travel in and out of that version of Tyria.

I suppose it could be a massive “fractal”…

[Bladestrom.6425]

4 hours ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Yes, absolutely this would be far easier and cheaper to develop.  But it's also essentially the same as playing without gear.

 

The reason I put so much emphasis on the aesthetics, and the social media benefits, of this idea is because it is designed to actually attract players (based on the particular focus group on this forum, not successfully 😂).

 

No one is going to pick up the game because "We've added an option to nerf yourself!" even if in practice that's very similar to upping the difficulty.  It's like before raids came out saying "Just do Fractals without gear!"  Yes, that would make for harder content, but it isn't going to attract many people.

 

 

That's why i inverted it, apply a factor to enhance the effect of mob attributes so you can play with same gear and food and utils. Your dmg output does not change, but your enemy has amplified aspects via a 'lensing' effect through the debuff.

 

What was suggested in opening post represents intrusive design changes that ends up with the same net effect + some cosmetic detail that quickly become old.  Furthermore it destroys continuity and the presentation of single a consistent persistent world and leaves you with a bunch of maps to be consumed in different modes, very much CORPG and not MMORPG.

 

Edited September 29, 2022 by vesica tempestas.1563

[Sobx.1758]

I still don't understand why suddenly "hardmode open world" is ok for OP, but doing things like soloing bounties isn't.

Not that I'm against harder open world btw, quite the opposite, I just don't think it makes much sense to split realms for that. Make expansion content gradually increasing in difficulty.

[Ashen.2907]

11 hours ago, Arnox.5128 said:

you didn't even specify WHY you don't want it.

A given customer does not need to tell a merchant why he will not consume a given product in order for his refusal to be valuable information for the merchant. Sure extra information can be, often is, useful...but it is not necessary.

[Embered.5089]

6 hours ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Unyielding?  You made two posts before getting hostile, and the second of those was telling me to go and play other games..  Yes, I think this is a good idea (that's why I suggested it).  Obviously I'm not going to immediately throw my hands up at the first concerns raised.

 

On the other bits, you described basically exactly what I'd do with a hard mode slot.  Except I'd add more account bound rewards (skins/achievements), and make some more mechanical changes like disabling gliding and most waypoints, and maybe add some debuffs so that incoming damage and conditions are more punishing.

 

I'm not convinced that this would be more appealing broadly.  There's very little advertising potential, and also it isn't something people would dip in and out of (especially with permadeath).  Yes it's obviously cheaper to implement, but I'm not sure it would bring in as much potential as something like my original idea.

Your first paragraph illustrates why I'm frustrated. You're posting on a public forum. You're replying to the masses. Yet somehow, you think that each post is its own individual thing, and think that my responses are separate from everyone else's. This isn't a private thread between you and I. I'm not the only person who's expressed concern with your idea. It's also your responses that show your lack of compromise, not mine. And the fact that I have much fewer responses than you only shows that you started the thread. Which you did. It's your thread. But it's our discussion. Not just yours and mine, but all of the players'. You don't seem to realize this. If ten people say no, you can't say that each individual's reply means nothing, because you're missing the point of a forum. It's a discussion. Everyone chips in. And the popular opinion wins in a majority vote.

Your second paragraph almost made me think that you're opening up to discussion, but your third paragraph makes me doubt. I think that I've contributed enough to this thread. There's no reason to try to discuss something with someone who isn't open to discussion.

[Arnox.5128]

48 minutes ago, Ashen.2907 said:

A given customer does not need to tell a merchant why he will not consume a given product in order for his refusal to be valuable information for the merchant.

No, it isn't. Many people didn't watch Firefly, but if we use your way of thinking here and just ignore any possible extraneous factors, cancelling it was indeed the way to go!

An absence of interest without any context means just about nothing. It DOES mean there's a problem. And that is IF the absence of interest is high enough. But nothing more than that.

And besides. By your own admission, more information is much better than no information anyway, so stop being so lazy please and specify a reason for your disagreement. Unless you're just trolling.

31 minutes ago, Embered.5089 said:

And the popular opinion wins in a majority vote.

Ever heard of Tyranny of the Majority? Popular vote doesn't automatically mean something is right and true.

Edited September 29, 2022 by Arnox.5128

[Embered.5089]

3 hours ago, Arnox.5128 said:

No, it isn't. Many people didn't watch Firefly, but if we use your way of thinking here and just ignore any possible extraneous factors, cancelling it was indeed the way to go!

An absence of interest without any context means just about nothing. It DOES mean there's a problem. And that is IF the absence of interest is high enough. But nothing more than that.

And besides. By your own admission, more information is much better than no information anyway, so stop being so lazy please and specify a reason for your disagreement. Unless you're just trolling.

Ever heard of Tyranny of the Majority? Popular vote doesn't automatically mean something is right and true.

You're not the person who I said that I wouldn't reply to, so I suppose that I should reply.

The quote "the customer is always right" is actually an unfinished quote. The full quote is "the customer is always right when it comes to fashion". The context was lost over time.

Similarly, the context here is a bit lost in your response to my post. The customer here is us players, and the fashion here is what we want in this game. Since ArenaNet is a profitable business, they would only develop something that would sell well, or which would create future profits at an acceptable cost. The easiest way to do this is to ask for the majority's opinion. As most of us are saying that we don't like the OP's idea, and the OP has not offered any directly profitable ideas and is lacking in considering cost/profit, I can't see ArenaNet doing something like this.

However, my gripe is not with the cost/profit or our ideas. My gripe is with how the OP responded to all of us. He brushed us off, with the exception of one idea that he doesn't seem to be taking seriously. It's his attitude that bothers me. I entertained his idea at first, but his lack of intent for discussion made his idea not worth entertaining. He's so immovable that he could be considered the tyrant of this thread. Luckily, it's ArenaNet who will decide what's best for Tyria, and the OP's insistence alone won't change that. Maybe they'll end up implementing it. That's fine; it doesn't harm me. It adds something novel, if a bit weird. But the implementation won't change what I think of the OP's attitude towards discussion.

Edit 1: I won't be replying to this thread anymore. It's draining me more than a game forum should, and it's getting personal. I don't want to get personal in a public game forum, so I should stop now. My post is starting to show incoherence.

Edit 2: My paragraph about the quote is fine as a standalone; it's something that I'd rather everyone know, anyway. I crossed out what doesn't make sense. At best, it doesn't convey what I had meant to convey. I lost the energy to argue in this thread, and I unfortunately lack the motivation to reiterate my points. There's no reason to, though. Anything else I say would just be me defending myself, and there's no reason to do that when no one's attacking me. It would just be my temper at this point.

Edited September 30, 2022 by Embered.5089

[Ashen.2907]

1 hour ago, Arnox.5128 said:

No, it isn't. Many people didn't watch Firefly, but if we use your way of thinking here and just ignore any possible extraneous factors, cancelling it was indeed the way to go!

An absence of interest without any context means just about nothing. It DOES mean there's a problem. And that is IF the absence of interest is high enough. But nothing more than that.

And besides. By your own admission, more information is much better than no information anyway, so stop being so lazy please and specify a reason for your disagreement. Unless you're just trolling.

Ever heard of Tyranny of the Majority? Popular vote doesn't automatically mean something is right and true.

If I own a tex-mex restaurant and add sushi to the menu and no one orders it, it doesn't matter why. I stop spending my resources on that expansion of the menu.

Businesses make very good business decisions based on consumer activity without any more feedback from the consumers than their activity all of the time. As I said before, having more specific or detailed feedback can be helpful,but is not necessary.

[Arnox.5128]

46 minutes ago, Ashen.2907 said:

If I own a tex-mex restaurant and add sushi to the menu and no one orders it, it doesn't matter why. I stop spending my resources on that expansion of the menu.

OR... You take a look again at the recipe and improve it, thus stumbling upon a menu item that people actually like more than the regular favorites. But if you just tossed it out on the first sign of failure with zero feedback, you would never have found that. The lack of feedback and laziness to iterate has just cost you something great just because you played it safe. And that's not what ANet does. Or at least, it sure as **** isn't something they should be doing.

Edited September 30, 2022 by Arnox.5128

[Freya.9075]

47 minutes ago, Arnox.5128 said:

OR... You take a look again at the recipe and improve it, thus stumbling upon a menu item that people actually like more than the regular favorites. But if you just tossed it out on the first sign of failure with zero feedback, you would never have found that. The lack of feedback and laziness to iterate has just cost you something great just because you played it safe. And that's not what ANet does. Or at least, it sure as **** isn't something they should be doing.

You could try to improve it and use a lot of resources doing so. It may or may not give good results and it’s a risk. Businesses make decisions if the risk is worth it or not depending on past experiences, data and their own experts. Since the example is Tex mex restaurant adding sushi, it’s probably not worth the risk for the business to use lots of resources to create a better recipe for sushi with customers who goes to a Tex mex restaurant. If they wanted sushi they would go somewhere else.
 

improving things involves risks and use of resources and may or may not give the result you want.  You could play the lottery too and stumble upon millions of dollars who knows. Is it worth the risk and investment? Probably not.

[Arnox.5128]

43 minutes ago, Freya.9075 said:

You could try to improve it and use a lot of resources doing so. It may or may not give good results and it’s a risk.

Every choice you take is a risk, and MMOs are by FAR the most risky games of all to make. You don't get into this business playing it safe and then expect to come out ahead. You won't. And yeah, obviously some risks are smarter than others, but regardless, just saying taking the time to improve something has risk is not really an argument for or against anything.

End of the day, leave quality feedback so the devs can understand your point of view and help to make more informed decisions instead of giving a BS answer of "No," that doesn't actually help anyone.

[Freya.9075]

12 minutes ago, Arnox.5128 said:

Every choice you take is a risk, and MMOs are by FAR the most risky games of all to make. You don't get into this business playing it safe and then expect to come out ahead. You won't. And yeah, obviously some risks are smarter than others, but regardless, just saying taking the time to improve something has risk is not really an argument for or against anything.

End of the day, leave quality feedback so the devs can understand your point of view and help to make more informed decisions instead of giving a BS answer of "No," that doesn't actually help anyone.

For sure feedback can be good. I don't think anyone is saying it can not. But the keyword here is "quality feedback". Most of the feedbacks and suggestions in forums are not that. Lots of it are players ranting or claiming their opinions to be facts. And other players want a certain content or item to be added, (which can be good or bad) but is not a good thing to add in reality or ppl just don't like the suggestion.

How you present what you want is key. Most ppl don't want their opinions or suggestions to be discussed, and that's what ppl react to most of the times. And sometimes a simple "no" is all that is needed to say your opinion of the topic.