Legendary Relics Don't Work as they were Announced [Merged]

[Astralporing.1957]

4 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

It's both, and sure Arenanet is in part to blame for that due to past communication.

Still they will get flack for almost anything they put out. Last time seen around the time communication was up with EoD.

This very thread has a few players which are not even active in the game, but still feel the need to complain. That's not GW2 unique btw, it happens on all game forums. Still it's unfair to dismiss this attitude as non existent.

The developers absolutely need to clear up their communication and work on not promising something, then not delivering on that promise. Meanwhile some players might want to check their personal approach, entitlement and personal responsibility contributing to these issues. Can't blame a developer for reducing communication with such an audience (which I personally disagree with, I think communication is always key, but I get they they are going back to being less open).

Notice, how a lot of the issues we're talking now are because they refused to offer clarifications abut things when people asked. The issue that started this very thread (the fact that Legendary Relic needs SotO purchase to get SotO relic options) was exactly such a case. The post that described how the future unlocks will work was made relatively shortly before Legendary relic implementation, and i doubt there were any last-time changes since then. So, when people asked a question about SotO relics, they almost certainly already knew the answer, and yet kept ignoring that question over and over again. Had they answered then, the issue would not have existed. Some people might have still complained, of course, but it would have been simply subsumed by the discussion about future unlocking, that happened anyway.

As far as information backlash goes, there was no downside to answering that question right away, instead of letting players find it on their own. Any negative feelings that might have resulted from such an information are only higher now, not lower.

In general, Anet, whenever they have something to announce that they know might not be liked, have a tendency to rather go silent instead, hoping the issue will miraculously blow over, or maybe noone will notice. Except people will notice, and may thing they were being deceived. And that's definitely not the kind of reputation you want to build up.

Yes, i also agree where Anet devs come from when they refuse to engage with community, fearing backlash and bad reactions, but that's simply not a job for the devs. That's what a dedicated PR/community relations staff are for. Anet seems to be heavily lacking in that department from the very beginning, and all the past issues, instead of teaching them the importance of investing into it, only (and inevitably) make things worse.

[Rubi Bayer.8493]

Hey all, I did some looking into this for you. Further internal review after that blog was posted led us to limit SOTO relic effects behind SOTO access as well. We failed to communicate that before release, and we apologize for the confusion.

[Cyninja.2954]

Just now, Rubi Bayer.8493 said:

Hey all, I did some looking into this for you. Further internal review after that blog was posted led us to limit SOTO relic effects behind SOTO access as well. We failed to communicate that before release, and we apologize for the confusion.

Thanks for clearing that up. Now this thread can come to an end.

[Sobx.1758]

On 3/18/2024 at 12:44 AM, Labjax.2465 said:

I don't think I need to draw up any hypotheticals to get the point across. This thread itself has examples of posters downplaying people's own cited personal experience issues. You yourself in this thread say "nobody was screwed over by the change" when there is somebody 2 posts above you who just described a way in which they were. There is a difference between arguing over a larger narrative about the game's direction and telling someone their complaint about the game is invalid or being dismissive of it, and some people can go so hard into the 2nd one, there's a reason I posed a question like, "I would truly like to know what you think is the worst that happens if you were to agree with me that the situation is abnormally bad."

Not as some gotcha, but because I genuinely don't understand what some people think is going to happen that will be so bad if they aren't pushing back so hard against negative feedback. I have seen in the past with open world legendary armor where in spite of some people being viciously against those who asked for it, it got implemented. So I don't really understand what people think they are accomplishing when they try to undermine, or be dismissive toward, someone who is trying to communicate their desires about the game and their state of mind about it. I want people to think about what they are doing and for what purpose, and that's what that question was about.

In my experience (and this applies to fandoms generally, far too often) it is almost never the case that someone who adores a product gets flak for doing so, but if someone has problems with it, even if they are a current and long-time fan who is actively using the product and enjoying it, then: if their feedback is emotional, they will be told to calm down or to leave; if it's detached, they will be accused of being someone who is only pretending to care and is trying to instigate; if it's personal, they will be told their experience doesn't matter much or is inconsequential; if they try to make it empirical, they will be told their facts are incorrect or are unimportant. How this is supposed to benefit players, I'm not sure. We are far more on the same side even at our most annoyed with each other than we will ever be on the same side with the company whose products we buy. Their agenda and goals are not ours and satisfaction occurs when our goals intersect with theirs in ways that result in mutual benefit, not because of any point where our goals are identical with theirs. I cannot emphasize this enough. This is really really really important for people to understand because if you think you are on the same side as the company, you will get burned in the moments when it becomes impossible to ignore that their agenda and goals are fundamentally different from your own. And it's not supposed to be a reason to be randomly mean or hostile toward a given company (I actually go out of my way to humanize the employees themselves when I talk about these things), this aspect of it is just about understanding power and agendas.

Please, I am begging people to reflect on this. If you want to ignore everything else that I say or want to dismiss every single thing I've ever said about this particular game, ok, drop in the bucket, doesn't matter, but please listen and reflect on this one point, not for my sake or your sake, but for our sake.

People disagree with you not because they think something bad will happen to [them/the game/the world] once they agree. People disagree with you, because they think your complaints are forced and bad. One could imagine consistently announcing how glad you are that you've quit [way before soto or any changes/announcement you're complaining about now] only helps putting those complaints (like "new WV dailies make it harder to come back after taking a break from the game"?) in perspective.

Edited March 19 by Sobx.1758

[XenesisII.1540]

Yeah that's great what's a few hundred gold down the drain for some people anyways. How does anet come up with an impactful decision like that and not immediately tell the players about the correction. 😏

[Cuks.8241]

15 hours ago, Mistwraithe.3106 said:

Exactly. Because they need to make money to continue to develop the game and many of the obvious hooks that could be put into new expansions are already well served (gliding, mounts, elite specs, legendaries).

Your choices are really to either have game support and development reduce or accept that they need to make a few (relatively minor tbh) changes like this to add extra benefits to buying the expansions. Note that it's just one lever, they also have more things (eg last expansion had OW legendary armour, extra weapon proficiencies, strikes, accessible Skyscale and story) they add in each expansion but Anet clearly feel they need the relic lever as well.

I'm fully in the latter camp as I want GW2 to continue to be developed as much as possible. This is a non-issue to me and tbh I'm surprised that legendaries weren't made this way from the start (ie it's surprising Anet didn't make it that you had to buy expansions to unlock stat bonuses in your legendaries from the start).

Or they could make good quality content and charge it accordingly.

Good content doesnt require any additional hooks and levers to get money out of customers.

[Linken.6345]

4 hours ago, Rubi Bayer.8493 said:

Hey all, I did some looking into this for you. Further internal review after that blog was posted led us to limit SOTO relic effects behind SOTO access as well. We failed to communicate that before release, and we apologize for the confusion.

Great could core owners get a title .. I made a rune and all I got was a usless thing .. in purple text?

[Mistwraithe.3106]

11 hours ago, Cuks.8241 said:

Or they could make good quality content and charge it accordingly.

Good content doesnt require any additional hooks and levers to get money out of customers.

What's good content? I presume you mean a good story?

I agree a good story is important. But a significant number of players have openly said in this thread and elsewhere that they don't care about the story, they only play for WvW or PvP or instanced content (there's a thread right now about someone who says they only play instanced content and don't care about the story). What's the hook for people who play these modes and essentially care mainly about the gameplay / combat system and? Elite specialisations were the hook but Anet rightly concluded it would be a mistake to add new elite specs every mini-expansion.

Surely it has to be things like the expansion relics and new weapon specialisations? So exactly what Anet are doing and you are complaining about?

I feel like many of the people posting in this thread haven't even tried to understand why Anet might be acting the way they are. 

Edited March 20 by Mistwraithe.3106

[Labjax.2465]

11 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

People disagree with you not because they think something bad will happen to [them/the game/the world] once they agree. People disagree with you, because they think your complaints are forced and bad. One could imagine consistently announcing how glad you are that you've quit [way before soto or any changes/announcement you're complaining about now] only helps putting those complaints (like "new WV dailies make it harder to come back after taking a break from the game"?) in perspective.

Not really. If I reflect on it, from what I can recall, the only ones who give my posts much attention are the ones who are routinely defending Anet throughout this, regardless of who complains, what their complaint is, or whether they are an away player, a casually invested player, a long time veteran, or anywhere between. Which shows me I'm doing more or less what I intend to be doing. Those who want better/different and are willing to vocalize it, even if it means spending some lengthy time criticizing the game they love, generally don't seem to have a problem with me or ignore me. So I'm on the side I want to be on. I made an honest try to take it further than that and reach a hand across the table to the people who are routinely defending, and I'm not sure if it did anything. It is what it is.

But one thing is clear, is that whatever way I were to describe myself as a player: not playing, playing a lot, played for one year, played for twenty years... some people would find a way to turn it against me, regardless. Not because it's me, but because some people do that with anyone who gets critical in ways they don't like. I had hoped to make some headway on what's going on there, but again, dunno if the intention got through at all. That's life.

[Astralporing.1957]

Seems that indeed this thread can come to an end... but not in a satisfying way. IMO a better decision would have been to go the other direction - acknowledge that since the change of direction was not communicated properly, it would be delayed, as originally announced, till next expansion.

I really hope that "internal review" has shown that it was worth losing player trust (again) in order to get the meager impact of making SotO worth buying a little bit more. I'm personally not so sure. As i see it, the moment where such gear restrictions become key point in deciding whether an expansion should be bought or not would be the point any hope for the future of this game would end. Because it would mean the expansions would have nothing meaningful left to offer beyond that. If that's the direction you want to go, that would be a real shame.

[Smoky.5348]

ANET continues to communicate poorly.

Forumgoers continue to shoot down every bit of criticism.

I'd love to engage more fluently if it were worth a kitten.

[Astralporing.1957]

4 hours ago, Mistwraithe.3106 said:

 agree a good story is important. But a significant number of players have openly said in this thread and elsewhere that they don't care about the story, they only play for WvW or PvP or instanced content (there's a thread right now about someone who says they only play instanced content and don't care about the story). What's the hook for people who play these modes and essentially care mainly about the gameplay / combat system and?

The hook for those would be content designed for them. Some attention actually paid to PvP modes would do much more for SPvP/WvW players than relic lockouts could ever do. And instanced content players obviously do not need constant balance reshuffling - what they need is new and interesting instanced content.

Want to interest raiders more? Don't give them new especs. Give them a new raid wing. Or, barring that, some new strikes/strike CMs. And keep managing the current espec/gear balance better, instead of blowing it up sky-high with new stuff.

Want to interest fractal community more? Again, better (and more stable) balance, and more fractals.

Want to interest OW players more? Interesting (but also rewarding) maps, story and content that are not build around a single gimmick most players will likely nto care about (like rifts and legendary armor).

For players of PvP modes, i can't really say (not being one myself), but i'd say better balancing and more resources invested in said modes would, again, be far better than expansion-based lockouts on gear.

Expansion based gear progression is something you'd only use if you cannot deliver anything better than that. Or, if you just want to play it cheap and save on actual work.

[Ashantara.8731]

On 3/19/2024 at 4:21 AM, Mistwraithe.3106 said:

Exactly. Because they need to make money to continue to develop the game

You mean to develop a new game while milking the last bits out of GW2.

[Mistwraithe.3106]

19 minutes ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

The hook for those would be content designed for them. Some attention actually paid to PvP modes would do much more for SPvP/WvW players than relic lockouts could ever do. And instanced content players obviously do not need constant balance reshuffling - what they need is new and interesting instanced content.

Want to interest raiders more? Don't give them new especs. Give them a new raid wing. Or, barring that, some new strikes/strike CMs. And keep managing the current espec/gear balance better, instead of blowing it up sky-high with new stuff.

Want to interest fractal community more? Again, better (and more stable) balance, and more fractals.

Want to interest OW players more? Interesting (but also rewarding) maps, story and content that are not build around a single gimmick most players will likely nto care about (like rifts and legendary armor).

For players of PvP modes, i can't really say (not being one myself), but i'd say better balancing and more resources invested in said modes would, again, be far better than expansion-based lockouts on gear.

Expansion based gear progression is something you'd only use if you cannot deliver anything better than that. Or, if you just want to play it cheap and save on actual work.

New strikes or a raid wing is indeed good expansion content for instance players. But pretty much everything else you mention, while a good idea, doesn't offer a hook to encourage these players to buy expansions.

Unless Anet start making new fractals only available to people who own the next expansion? Or somehow improve class/PvP/WvW balance only for people who buy an expansion? I think there would be a far greater outcry if they did either of these.

Seems to me that the weapon specs, soto relics, easier skyscale, strikes were pretty good ways of adding nice benefits to people who bought SOTO while still keeping the impacts pretty mild for people who don't buy SOTO. It seems inline with the benefits from elite specs, gliding, mounts, strikes/raids introduced in earlier expansions. If anything SOTO seems rather milder in terms of penalising people who don't buy the expansions than previous expansions were.

Edited March 20 by Mistwraithe.3106

[Astralporing.1957]

5 minutes ago, Mistwraithe.3106 said:

New strikes or a raid wing is indeed good expansion content for instance players. But pretty much everything else you mention, while a good idea, doesn't offer a hook to encourage these players to buy expansions.

Unless Anet start making new fractals only available to people who own the next expansion? Or somehow improve class/PvP/WvW balance only for people who buy an expansion? I think there would be a far greater outcry if they did either of these.

Seems to me that the weapon specs, soto relics, easier skyscale, strikes were pretty good ways of adding nice benefits to people who bought SOTO while still keeping the impacts pretty mild for people who don't buy SOTO. It seems inline with the benefits from elite specs, gliding, mounts, strikes/raids introduced in earlier expansions. If anything SOTO seems rather milder in terms of penalising people who don't buy the expansions than previous expansions were.

Problem is, SotO was rather poor in offering anything else that is intresting. And Anet leaning more heavily on gear locks shows they do intend to keep it that way.

And as for what to offer SPvP/WvW players in order to make them buy next expansion... that's a wrong question. If you just add up expansion requirements on those modes without first offering those players something to really hook them in, you will just end up decreasing populations of those modes. Make people interested by doing something for the mode they play in, and they will buy the expansions, just to show their support for the modes. Don;t do that, and they will think you're trying to fleece them without offering anything back.

[Mistwraithe.3106]

2 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Problem is, SotO was rather poor in offering anything else that is intresting. And Anet leaning more heavily on gear locks shows they do intend to keep it that way.

And as for what to offer SPvP/WvW players in order to make them buy next expansion... that's a wrong question. If you just add up expansion requirements on those modes without first offering those players something to really hook them in, you will just end up decreasing populations of those modes. Make people interested by doing something for the mode they play in, and they will buy the expansions, just to show their support for the modes. Don;t do that, and they will think you're trying to fleece them without offering anything back.

I know what you are saying. But the reality is that Anet need both good content which makes the game (all modes interesting) AND combat/gameplay reasons for people to want to buy the expansion.

I absolutely guarantee that all of the expansions sold more copies than they would have if there hadn't been elite specs, weapon specs, and now relics, that you needed to buy the expansions to use. It's just common sense and economics.

[Cuks.8241]

7 hours ago, Mistwraithe.3106 said:

What's good content? I presume you mean a good story?

I agree a good story is important. But a significant number of players have openly said in this thread and elsewhere that they don't care about the story, they only play for WvW or PvP or instanced content (there's a thread right now about someone who says they only play instanced content and don't care about the story). What's the hook for people who play these modes and essentially care mainly about the gameplay / combat system and? Elite specialisations were the hook but Anet rightly concluded it would be a mistake to add new elite specs every mini-expansion.

Surely it has to be things like the expansion relics and new weapon specialisations? So exactly what Anet are doing and you are complaining about?

I feel like many of the people posting in this thread haven't even tried to understand why Anet might be acting the way they are. 

For me it's very easy. This is not solely for gw2.

New original content: new maps (can be pve/pvp/wvw), new classes/elite specs/weapons (weapons as implemented in gw2, not just skins), new events/quests, new storylines/campaigns, new game modes, new systems/assets that bring new gameplay patterns (this one is very broad but for example if they introduced new siege in wvw that would change how battles are fought I would consider it new content. New mounts, gliding can go under this also).

Not-content: a new reward box for the existing system, repackaging of old systems under a new name and reinventing  the acquisition method (possibly done so it can be better monetized) , new skins (this is my personal, for some skins are important, for me it doesn't add much to the game), new qol features like equipment templates, balance changes. Not saying these are redundant or a bad thing but it's not really new content. I would consider them normal product lifecycle management but not new or new version of the product. 

Edited March 20 by Cuks.8241

[Kranlor Greyhelm.8417]

18 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Thanks for clearing that up. Now this thread can come to an end.

It very much WASN'T cleared up. This is ANET finally admitting that they changed their minds about something that they had specifically and explicitly explained to the players, and not even bothering to tell players that they'd made that change.

I know you are desperate to carry water for ANET for some unknown reason, but suggesting that this is enough to shut down the discussions in this thread is laughable. But given that you've spent a good amount of time blaming the players for the mess that ANET have made of this whole situation, because we have the temerity to complain about it, I shouldn't be surprised.

They also aren't suggesting they are going to go back on it; so once again it's a poor decision that goes against a previous decision and works to the detriment of a subset of players. It's starting to become a pattern, and a worrying one at that.

[Cyninja.2954]

5 minutes ago, Kranlor Greyhelm.8417 said:

It very much WASN'T cleared up. This is ANET finally admitting that they changed their minds about something that they had specifically and explicitly explained to the players, and not even bothering to tell players that they'd made that change.

I know you are desperate to carry water for ANET for some unknown reason, but suggesting that this is enough to shut down the discussions in this thread is laughable. But given that you've spent a good amount of time blaming the players for the mess that ANET have made of this whole situation, because we have the temerity to complain about it, I shouldn't be surprised.

They also aren't suggesting they are going to go back on it; so once again it's a poor decision that goes against a previous decision and works to the detriment of a subset of players. It's starting to become a pattern, and a worrying one at that.

No, infact it was cleared up. An answer was demanded. You expecting a change is on you.

See that's what I was saying in the beginning: this thread isn't about communication just some players wanting things changed their way disguised as compmaint about miscommunication.

[Cuks.8241]

49 minutes ago, Mistwraithe.3106 said:

I know what you are saying. But the reality is that Anet need both good content which makes the game (all modes interesting) AND combat/gameplay reasons for people to want to buy the expansion.

Relic lockouts and reinventing how legendary gear works that on top is not in favour of players doesn't fall under either of those. It doesn't change, improve or add to combat or gameplay in any way. 

[Astralporing.1957]

3 hours ago, Mistwraithe.3106 said:

I know what you are saying. But the reality is that Anet need both good content which makes the game (all modes interesting) AND combat/gameplay reasons for people to want to buy the expansion.

I absolutely guarantee that all of the expansions sold more copies than they would have if there hadn't been elite specs, weapon specs, and now relics, that you needed to buy the expansions to use. It's just common sense and economics.

And i am 100% sure that going more heavy on stat/gear reasons to buy the expansions while at the same time delivering less content in them is going to result in a much lower count of people buying the expansions that doing the exact opposite would have.

If they can do only one, they should try to deliver the content first. If they cannot do that, then this game's done no matter how many gear/stat/build based reasons they will think of to persuade people to still buy expansions.

For me personally, the moment i will think that the gear lockouts are the key reason for why i might want to buy an expansion will be the moment i will stop buying them. And likely stop playing.

Edited March 20 by Astralporing.1957

[Mistwraithe.3106]

9 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

And i am 100% sure that going more heavy on stat/gear reasons to buy the expansions while at the same time delivering less content in them is going to result in a much lower count of people buying the expansions that doing the exact opposite would have.

If they can do only one, they should try to deliver the content first. If they cannot do that, then this game's done no matter how many gear/stat/build based reasons they will think of to persuade people to still buy expansions.

You seem to be working on the assumption that making SOTO relics only available to people who bought SOTO somehow took a lot of development hours and consequently reduced the amount of other content.

That seems extremely unlikely. No content was killed in making SOTO relics require owning SOTO.

So really your complaint boils down to not liking the "content" or amount of "content" in SOTO rather than being about how legendary relics work?

 

Edited March 20 by Mistwraithe.3106

[Astralporing.1957]

40 minutes ago, Mistwraithe.3106 said:

You seem to be working on the assumption that making SOTO relics only available to people who bought SOTO somehow took a lot of development hours and consequently reduced the amount of other content.

That seems extremely unlikely. No content was killed in making SOTO relics require owning SOTO.

No. I know well aware that what they are doing is a cheap copout they do because they cannot afford anything better. I am pointing out that cheaping out on content while driving up the gear grind-like mechanics is not a good approach. Sure, it may increase necesity of having to buy a newer expansion, but in order to  truly drive that necessity, you need to persuade the people to be interested in playing first. If you do not, you might end up with players not buying the expack (because it's way subpar) and then giving up on playing even the previous content, because they felt they have been left behind.

That old promise of never having to feel the need to catch up was quite important for many people, you know.

Sure, you can say that relic options are not that important and you can easily play without them, but that works both ways. If the pressure is so weak, the effect on buying expansion will also be minimal to the point of not really being visible. And the moment it becomes something that might truly push players into buying an expansion even when nothing else in it would do so, it will also becomes something that might push those that did not catch up from playing.

Gear grind games get away with it due to the whole ecosystem being built around it, and thanks to delivering massive amounts of content with every expansion. They have to, because at the same time all old content becomes practically invalidated. Those games, you generally either play current expac, or you don't play at all.

40 minutes ago, Mistwraithe.3106 said:

So really your complaint boils down to not liking the "content" or amount of "content" in SOTO rather than being about how legendary relics work?

It's a combination of the two. The whole "you need to buy soto" thing is not an issue to me on its own. It became one for two reasons First, because i feel such cheap tricks show Anet is getting desperate about pushing players towards playing content they themselves know is not worth it. They would not have made such moves if they thought players would be interested otherwise (and no, please, do not speak about WvW/SPvP - we both know that the amount of players playing those two modes exclusively is so tiny it has no real impact on the overall sales). Second, because they happened to say something different in their blogpost, and apparently thought nothing about changing that decision just days later... or communicating the change to the playerbase. That shows a significant lack of consideration for the community. And their decision to double down on it, instead of owning to the mistake and adjusting their decision to the one they announced (instead of the other way around) shows they do not really care how they are perceived by said playerbase either.  And both are a very, very bad signs.

When added to the previous point, it becomes even more worrying. That's because it looks like a behaviour of those game studios that go for short-term increase in revenue without caring about long term impact. That's the exact opposite from how usually the stable MMORPGs operate.

In short, it looks to me as if Anet decided they now just want to get as much out of the game shortterm, for as little investment as possible, without caring about what will happen later

[Sobx.1758]

17 hours ago, Labjax.2465 said:

Not really. If I reflect on it, from what I can recall, the only ones who give my posts much attention are the ones who are routinely defending Anet throughout this, regardless of who complains, what their complaint is, or whether they are an away player, a casually invested player, a long time veteran, or anywhere between. Which shows me I'm doing more or less what I intend to be doing. Those who want better/different and are willing to vocalize it, even if it means spending some lengthy time criticizing the game they love, generally don't seem to have a problem with me or ignore me. So I'm on the side I want to be on. I made an honest try to take it further than that and reach a hand across the table to the people who are routinely defending, and I'm not sure if it did anything. It is what it is.

If you're seeing those routinely defending posters, maybe you should stop posting routinely bad complaints (like the wv dailies somehow making it harder to come back to the game after breaks? Still didn't explain how that's supposed to make any sense). It's an interesting way to cope with disagreement though.

17 hours ago, Labjax.2465 said:

But one thing is clear, is that whatever way I were to describe myself as a player: not playing, playing a lot, played for one year, played for twenty years... some people would find a way to turn it

Nope, it's specifically related to repeatedly boasting about being glad you left year/s ago, before we even knew about any changes you're complaining about now, while you're now trying to repeatedly build claims these are the reasons to leave/not come back or w/e (all the while you're -per your own words, if I remember correctly- enjoying another online game and their community). The sentence you just wrote here is baseless, the same way your attempt to tell me "it looks like I'm not playing the game at all" was. And similarly to that empty claim, I have no doubts this one will also remain unexplained.

 

On 3/13/2024 at 11:05 AM, Labjax.2465 said:

Anyway, I guess the point is, Anet has got some explaining to do in this situation.

One way or another, anet posted an explanation and -whether you liked that explanation or not- you didn't bother as much as even acknowledging it. Wonder... what now?

Edited March 20 by Sobx.1758

[Mistwraithe.3106]

5 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

No. I know well aware that what they are doing is a cheap copout they do because they cannot afford anything better. I am pointing out that cheaping out on content while driving up the gear grind-like mechanics is not a good approach. Sure, it may increase necesity of having to buy a newer expansion, but in order to  truly drive that necessity, you need to persuade the people to be interested in playing first. If you do not, you might end up with players not buying the expack (because it's way subpar) and then giving up on playing even the previous content, because they felt they have been left behind.

That old promise of never having to feel the need to catch up was quite important for many people, you know.

Sure, you can say that relic options are not that important and you can easily play without them, but that works both ways. If the pressure is so weak, the effect on buying expansion will also be minimal to the point of not really being visible. And the moment it becomes something that might truly push players into buying an expansion even when nothing else in it would do so, it will also becomes something that might push those that did not catch up from playing.

Gear grind games get away with it due to the whole ecosystem being built around it, and thanks to delivering massive amounts of content with every expansion. They have to, because at the same time all old content becomes practically invalidated. Those games, you generally either play current expac, or you don't play at all.

It's a combination of the two. The whole "you need to buy soto" thing is not an issue to me on its own. It became one for two reasons First, because i feel such cheap tricks show Anet is getting desperate about pushing players towards playing content they themselves know is not worth it. They would not have made such moves if they thought players would be interested otherwise (and no, please, do not speak about WvW/SPvP - we both know that the amount of players playing those two modes exclusively is so tiny it has no real impact on the overall sales). Second, because they happened to say something different in their blogpost, and apparently thought nothing about changing that decision just days later... or communicating the change to the playerbase. That shows a significant lack of consideration for the community. And their decision to double down on it, instead of owning to the mistake and adjusting their decision to the one they announced (instead of the other way around) shows they do not really care how they are perceived by said playerbase either.  And both are a very, very bad signs.

When added to the previous point, it becomes even more worrying. That's because it looks like a behaviour of those game studios that go for short-term increase in revenue without caring about long term impact. That's the exact opposite from how usually the stable MMORPGs operate.

In short, it looks to me as if Anet decided they now just want to get as much out of the game shortterm, for as little investment as possible, without caring about what will happen later

I understand what you are saying but I don't agree with your conclusions. In this post and others you are essentially saying Anet have got greedy and have put too many hooks into SOTO to force people to buy the expansion to compete in combat/gameplay.

But I think it's pretty indisputable that the combat/gameplay "hooks" in SOTO are weaker than they were in HoT, PoF and EoD.  Each of those expansions had elite specialisations which added significant combat options (and also a bit of power creep as demonstrated by the fact that Snowcrows doesn't list any core professions on its DPS charts, only elite specs). You need those HoT, PoF, EoD elite specs much more than you need SOTO's weapon specs and SOTO specific relics.

So why are you losing it so much over SOTO? If anything it demonstrates less greed and less hooks than previous expansions.