2023 Roadmap Posted, and I'm left with a question for the Devs

[Val.7826]

On 2/13/2023 at 7:00 PM, Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

See above comment.

 

Yeah I was being sarcastic, underwater combat it's a thing that probably devs don't even want to update while they are somehow forced to integrate in maps (luckily). My comment was more a hope then a real consideration, because I think it has potential, I won't complain if they'll add a map with a lot of underwater content and a little rework on underwater combat

[Esufer.8762]

48 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

As I've said elsewhere, my suspicion is that they're not committing to elite specs because if the mini-expansions are going to be more frequent than every two years or so, that's probably too short a timeframe for a full set of elites.

I think it's also worth noting that EoD has had a lot of balance changes since it's launched, as well as a lot of things that may not have been tested in all game modes (i'm speculating here, but there's a lot of stuff that was ridiculous unbalanced on launch). I don't mind them releasing Elite Specs less often if it means that specs will launch in a more complete/balanced (ideally both) state.

Now they have dedicated workstreams for balance and skill tuning in CMC and Roy, it's entirely possible they're wanting to make sure they release new classes when the time is right rather than pouring jet fuel onto a tyre fire by rushing out new classes. 

[Serephen.3420]

8 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

You know you already do pay for specs right? Why would the TP be different?

Because there is a different nature to that. It's more likely to result in further power creep or making them over the top just so they sell. It's more vulnerable to those issues as a standalone sale. 

[Obtena.7952]

7 minutes ago, Serephen.3420 said:

Because there is a different nature to that. It's more likely to result in further power creep or making them over the top just so they sell. It's more vulnerable to those issues as a standalone sale. 

Weird take considering when you paid for them the current way, you waited months/years for the content to surface. This new way is that you get the content when you pay for it. 

Real time payment of mini-expansions are more likely to result in further power creep? Um, that could be true ... but it's not different than the way it has been with HoT, PoF or EoD so ... not really seeing the issue there. Furthermore, power creep is a spec design problem, not an encounter design problem. What makes anyone sure we are getting especs with these mini-expansions in a way that results in further power creep? I don't see it. If we get an espec, why would it be any different than how we get them from a full expansion?

I mean, assuming the content is released like LS episodes ... where is this power creep you talking about? LS episodes didn't impact class performance, like, at all. 

Edited February 16, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Serephen.3420]

5 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Weird take considering when you paid for them the current way, you waited months/years for the content to surface. This new way is that you get the content when you pay for it. 

Real time payment of mini-expansions are more likely to result in further power creep? Um, that could be true ... but it's not different than the way it has been so ... not really seeing the issue there. Furthermore, power creep is a spec design problem, not an encounter problem. What makes anyone sure we are getting especs with these mini-expansions in a way that results in further power creep? I don't see it. 

I mean, assuming the content is released like LS episodes ... where is this power creep you talking about? LS episodes didn't impact class performance, like, at all. 

I'm not talking about mini expacs at all... I am saying selling specs on the TP separately is a thing p2w games do and there is more pressure to get people to buy specific specs. 

 

I think there was a misunderstanding?

[Obtena.7952]

4 minutes ago, Serephen.3420 said:

I'm not talking about mini expacs at all... I am saying selling specs on the TP separately is a thing p2w games do and there is more pressure to get people to buy specific specs. 

 

I think there was a misunderstanding?

Yes there was a misunderstanding on my end.

BUT ... selling specs on the TP separately won't be any more power creeped than including them in the expansions. I would argue no one really knows if a spec is power creeped until they are actually purchased anyways, whether it's from the TP or included in an expansion. 

The thing to care about is how they get adjusted after they are released ... which they inevitably are. I don't think this is some trick Anet uses to get people to buy expansions either. It's just the way it works. 

Edited February 16, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Panda.1967]

To me this whole new direction reads as a scummy cash grab… they are effectively rebranding living world as “mini expansions” and removing their free release schedule to make them paid only content while simultaneously removing real expansions entirely… this is very dangerous waters they are treading and it is very likely to blow up in their faces if they make even the slightest misstep.

One of the worst things they can do with this is to release content that is no different from current living world content. There would be no selling point to these mini-expansions beyond “continue the story and explore this new map” they need to give us some sort of incentive to actually buy the content.

Elite specs are a major draw for most players when it comes to expansions. Sure there are issues with how elite specs are made and balance concerns with adding more of them, but they are still the main selling point of expansions. Imagine if EoD had no new elite specs. How many of you would have still bought the expansion? Probably not very many…

If elite specs are not added with mini-expansions, they will have to devise an alternative incentive to use as a selling point. By the sound of things, mini-expansions will be cash purchase only, meaning not available on the gem store. If this is the case, they could include a sizable amount of gems with the purchase as a “bonus” to act as an incentive… though that wouldn't work as a selling point. If they add new elite specs as gemstore purchases over time, then those bonus gems can become an effective incentive but it’ll always feel scummy…

They will never get the prices right on any of this either. Ask yourself, how much do you think is fair for an elite spec? How much would you pay for a single elite spec? How much would you pay for a full set of 9 elite specs? Ask your friends the same questions, and ask a few random people in game too… you’ll see just how varied the answers are… and odds are the numbers anet settles on wont line up with even the majority consensus.

This of course all relies on them not making other terrible decisions along the way too… like constantly trying to one-up their previous elite spec release to drive up sales resulting in massive power creep and imbalances…

Edited February 16, 2023 by Panda.1967

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

How much would I pay for just 9 elite specs? No new story, no new maps, no new rewards, no new instanced PvE fights?

$20

[Infusion.7149]

1 hour ago, Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

How much would I pay for just 9 elite specs? No new story, no new maps, no new rewards, no new instanced PvE fights?

$20

That is generous but then again PoF (5 maps) and EoD (4 maps) alike were underpriced with an upsell on the higher editions.

For some context the entire Icebrood Saga LS5 with 3 maps or 4 maps if you count Bjora as two maps is $12 ($15 if you pay piece by piece), LS4 with 6 maps is $12, LS3 with 6 maps is $12, LS2 with 2 maps is $16 which is by far the worst value. All this pales in comparison to the 25 maps of the core GW2 game which launched at $60 USD or $80 for Deluxe and then reduced by $10 in May 2013.

The balance team, combat programmers, audio team for character skills only, and the people working on only character animation are a small subset of the full team. There are quite a few writers, cinematics personnel, environment artists, etc. See https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Game_credits#Guild_Wars_2:_End_of_Dragons_Credits

I am certain Arenanet will price it fairly as they received backlash for pricing Heart of Thorns with 4 maps at $50 for the base price (inflation adjusted to $63). See https://www.pcgamer.com/guild-wars-2-players-rightly-upset-by-heart-of-thorns-pre-purchase-scheme/  and https://www.eurogamer.net/guild-wars-2-community-reacts-angrily-to-heart-of-thorns-expansion-pricing

"Heart of Thorns isn't cheap. As a £35/$50 expansion, its price is comparable to many full games. Personally, I'm okay with the cost, because I've already had plenty of value from Guild Wars 2. There's no subscription, and, while I've probably bought about £15 of in-store gems over the two years I've been regularly playing the game, it never felt necessary to do so. Another £35 for more content, and more free updates, strikes me as an acceptable deal."

Anyhow $20-25 (about £16 to £21 , €19 to €24) for a more frequent biannual (?) or yearly expansion with more than half the maps (3 maps was stated by Josh Davis) and no new elite specs would not be surprising given how much Living story has been in the past. For all the potential complaining people have about it, unlike a subscription (most are going to be well above that per year) you would not be obligated to pay the price unless you want access to the content which is more fair for everyone. It is also quite contradictory for people running around in 1600 or 2000 gem mount/skiff skins (the equivalent in gems) to complain about an expansion cost IMO.

If you go all the way back to GW1, Eye of the North with no new professions was asking for $40 USD in 2007 which inflation adjusted is $58.

P.S. per Josh Davis the main reason for mini-expansions is press coverage they would not receive if putting out living world.

 

Edited February 16, 2023 by Infusion.7149

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

1 hour ago, Infusion.7149 said:

That is generous but then again PoF (5 maps) and EoD (4 maps) alike were underpriced with an upsell on the higher editions.

For some context the entire Icebrood Saga LS5 with 3 maps or 4 maps if you count Bjora as two maps is $12 ($15 if you pay piece by piece), LS4 with 6 maps is $12, LS3 with 6 maps is $12, LS2 with 2 maps is $16 which is by far the worst value. All this pales in comparison to the 25 maps of the core GW2 game which launched at $60 USD or $80 for Deluxe and then reduced by $10 in May 2013.

The balance team, combat programmers, audio team for character skills only, and the people working on only character animation are a small subset of the full team. There are quite a few writers, cinematics personnel, environment artists, etc. See https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Game_credits#Guild_Wars_2:_End_of_Dragons_Credits

I am certain Arenanet will price it fairly as they received backlash for pricing Heart of Thorns with 4 maps at $50 for the base price (inflation adjusted to $63). See https://www.pcgamer.com/guild-wars-2-players-rightly-upset-by-heart-of-thorns-pre-purchase-scheme/  and https://www.eurogamer.net/guild-wars-2-community-reacts-angrily-to-heart-of-thorns-expansion-pricing

"Heart of Thorns isn't cheap. As a £35/$50 expansion, its price is comparable to many full games. Personally, I'm okay with the cost, because I've already had plenty of value from Guild Wars 2. There's no subscription, and, while I've probably bought about £15 of in-store gems over the two years I've been regularly playing the game, it never felt necessary to do so. Another £35 for more content, and more free updates, strikes me as an acceptable deal."

Anyhow $20-25 (about £16 to £21 , €19 to €24) for a more frequent biannual (?) or yearly expansion with more than half the maps (3 maps was stated by Josh Davis) and no new elite specs would not be surprising given how much Living story has been in the past. For all the potential complaining people have about it, unlike a subscription (most are going to be well above that per year) you would not be obligated to pay the price unless you want access to the content which is more fair for everyone. It is also quite contradictory for people running around in 1600 or 2000 gem mount/skiff skins (the equivalent in gems) to complain about an expansion cost IMO.

If you go all the way back to GW1, Eye of the North with no new professions was asking for $40 USD in 2007 which inflation adjusted is $58.

P.S. per Josh Davis the main reason for mini-expansions is press coverage they would not receive if putting out living world.

 

Sure, it's generous, but that is what I would pay for an espec content pack.

[Mell.4873]

On 2/14/2023 at 6:00 AM, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

I'd be okay if they focused on balancing the existing 27 eSpecs rather than adding another 9 to the mix.  I'd be okay if they focused on balancing all the professions before even looking at making new content.  But balancing eSpecs doesn't pay the bills, expansions do, and since it costs them money to fix the mistakes they have made with the eSpecs (how many hours of fixing did Catalyst need as example), I can definitely see them not adding new eSpecs in the future.

Preferably, and based upon how content releases have been handled the past 2 years, they would release new eSpecs separate from new Story content as they don't have enough Devs to do both.

Im pretty sure they will drop new Elite Specialisations. I mean no one will enjoy what they craft since some older Elite is still better (I'm looking at you PvE Soulbeast when Untamed dropped) 

[Mell.4873]

On 2/14/2023 at 2:05 PM, Yasai.3549 said:

Underwater combat expansion.

I think at this point it is 100% confirmed since there isn't really much of Tyria we have not explored. 

There is also some sort of rumoured beast in the depths (probably a dragon again) 

[Yasai.3549]

1 hour ago, Mell.4873 said:

I think at this point it is 100% confirmed since there isn't really much of Tyria we have not explored. 

There is also some sort of rumoured beast in the depths (probably a dragon again) 

There are tons of lesser dragons but EoD may be Anet's promise to finally move away from the big bad dragon. 
There are LOTS of places which need story and lore fleshing out:

Rest of the Jade Sea

Dominion of Winds

More of Charr homelands beyond Grothmar 

Norn and Kodan homelands beyond Bjora

[otto.5684]

I dunno what this means for classes. Does this mean there will be no future elite classes? If that is a case, but there are additional expansions to classes, like more core skills or weapons, that is fine. If this means nothing new for classes, then no, I am not okay with that. I don’t care about the story or game modes. I only care for class content and new maps. Without class content, there would be little incentive to buy an expansion.

Edited February 17, 2023 by otto.5684

[Infusion.7149]

5 hours ago, Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

Sure, it's generous, but that is what I would pay for an espec content pack.

I actually remembered about GW1 PVP editions and the GW1 PVP access kit.

It is still up and right now is $10 https://store.guildwars.com/en-us/product/guild-wars-pvp-access-kit

I think it used to be $20 but that is all skills in the game , whereas an expansion's worth would be a fraction of that.

The Bonus Mission pack was $10 in 2007 and ~$15 in today's money after inflation. So we do have some approximate reference points of what something without professions (or in GW2 , elite specs) would be running for.

With an e-spec pack they would definitely be going for volume rather than per user profit. The ability to have as many players experience the new specs would be beneficial for their balance team and also any encounter design team.

Edited February 17, 2023 by Infusion.7149

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

7 hours ago, Infusion.7149 said:

I actually remembered about GW1 PVP editions and the GW1 PVP access kit.

It is still up and right now is $10 https://store.guildwars.com/en-us/product/guild-wars-pvp-access-kit

I think it used to be $20 but that is all skills in the game , whereas an expansion's worth would be a fraction of that.

The Bonus Mission pack was $10 in 2007 and ~$15 in today's money after inflation. So we do have some approximate reference points of what something without professions (or in GW2 , elite specs) would be running for.

With an e-spec pack they would definitely be going for volume rather than per user profit. The ability to have as many players experience the new specs would be beneficial for their balance team and also any encounter design team.

That is a fair assessment. But my answer was in relation to what I would pay for it, and yeah, I'd drop $20 for an espec pack.

[draxynnic.3719]

15 hours ago, Mell.4873 said:

I think at this point it is 100% confirmed since there isn't really much of Tyria we have not explored. 

Central Tyria, Elona, and Cantha combined are still less than half the world's land area. The regions from GW1 have been more or less covered, but there's still plenty of world left.