Thoughts about GW3 [Merged]

[Yerlock.4678]

19 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

I don't know what you're trying to say here. Try being more precise?

This game offers many hors d'oeuvres that are great in quality but smaller in size. Many Raiders keep waiting for Wing 8 in vain, many fractal players quickly get through most of the fractals, spvp only has one feasible game mode, wvw has waited for alliances for what seems like an eternity. When comparing the amount of content to other mmo's (like wow) the amount of releases is not as satisfactory due in part because anet has spread themselves too thin. They committed themselves to too many game modes, trying to commit to all of them in some way, but ultimately can't please everyone because they don't have enough manpower to make the amount of content for each game mode we want. I wish they could cut 1 or 2 of these modes for gw3, so the level of scope creep isn't as bad. This would allow them to make more content for the other modes, and would let players have much more to chew on and play instead of only get a taste of before basically playing what most of that mode has to offer.

I know this won't be a popular take for this community because we all are really used to what we've been playing, and I'm not saying "scrap everything for 3 modes" but reducing the bloat for gw3 would really benifit most of us in the end instead of trying to please everyone.

Edited April 24 by gmmg.9210

[Sobx.1758]

1 hour ago, gmmg.9210 said:

This game offers many hors d'oeuvres that are great in quality but smaller in size. Many Raiders keep waiting for Wing 8 in vain, many fractal players quickly get through most of the fractals, spvp only has one feasible game mode, wvw has waited for alliances for what seems like an eternity. When comparing the amount of content to other mmo's (like wow) the amount of releases is not as satisfactory due in part because anet has spread themselves too thin. They committed themselves to too many game modes, trying to commit to all of them in some way, but ultimately can't please everyone because they don't have enough manpower to make the amount of content for each game mode we want. I wish they could cut 1 or 2 of these modes for gw3, so the level of scope creep isn't as bad. This would allow them to make more content for the other modes, and would let players have much more to chew on and play instead of only get a taste of before basically playing what most of that mode has to offer.

I know this won't be a popular take for this community because we all are really used to what we've been playing, and I'm not saying "scrap everything for 3 modes" but reducing the bloat for gw3 would really benifit most of us in the end instead of trying to please everyone.

How are fractals/raids supposed to work in ow? How is wvw supposed to work in ow when everyone can freely turn it on and off any time they want? For now I don't see how any of these are supposed to be beneficial at all. I wonder what you're playing if you "have no idea what any of those lobbies are" btw -pvp only? In that case... I'm not sure why you decided to make a thread about lobbies when you don't understand what they do?

[Ashantara.8731]

17 hours ago, gmmg.9210 said:

This game offers many hors d'oeuvres that are great in quality but smaller in size. Many Raiders keep waiting for Wing 8 in vain, many fractal players quickly get through most of the fractals, spvp only has one feasible game mode, wvw has waited for alliances for what seems like an eternity.

Dungeons, Fractals, Raids and Strikes are a good example. They should stick to one version of instanced 5-player/10-player content instead of constantly introducing a new one that basically replaces the former.

Edited April 25 by Ashantara.8731

[Yerlock.4678]

6 hours ago, Ashantara.8731 said:

Dungeons, Fractals, Raids and Strikes are a good example. They should stick to one version of instanced 5-player/10-player content instead of constantly introducing a new one that basically replaces the former.

Hallelujah someone agrees. You can combine the best of those modes into one and cut a bunch of dev time needed so you could just make much more content for that mode and other modes also.

[Yerlock.4678]

21 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

How are fractals/raids supposed to work in ow? How is wvw supposed to work in ow when everyone can freely turn it on and off any time they want? For now I don't see how any of these are supposed to be beneficial at all. I wonder what you're playing if you "have no idea what any of those lobbies are" btw -pvp only? In that case... I'm not sure why you decided to make a thread about lobbies when you don't understand what they do?

I know what lobbies do I’m just saying there’s too many modes in this game and it’s stretching resources thin. Thus too many lobbies due to all these modes.

As to the wvw thing you could either have timers or restrictions barring people from flipping it on or off as many times as they like so they can’t easily escape combat once turned on, or have other servers which are wvw friendly where wvw mechanics are implemented. Basically their version of open world PvP conquest.

Edited April 25 by gmmg.9210

[Sobx.1758]

2 minutes ago, gmmg.9210 said:

I know what lobbies do I’m just saying there’s too many modes in this game and it’s stretching resources thin. Thus too many lobbies due to all these modes.

On 4/24/2024 at 12:51 AM, gmmg.9210 said:

I have no idea what any of those lobbies are, because we're basically playing two different games in one.

Ok, am I reading this wrong or what was this about?

And you didn't clarify on the first half of the post: How are fractals/raids supposed to work in ow? How is wvw supposed to work in ow when everyone can freely turn it on and off any time they want? For now I don't see how any of these are supposed to be beneficial at all.

Edited April 25 by Sobx.1758

[Sobx.1758]

6 hours ago, Ashantara.8731 said:

Dungeons, Fractals, Raids and Strikes are a good example. They should stick to one version of instanced 5-player/10-player content instead of constantly introducing a new one that basically replaces the former.

9 minutes ago, gmmg.9210 said:

Hallelujah someone agrees. You can combine the best of those modes into one and cut a bunch of dev time needed so you could just make much more content for that mode and other modes also.

I think you're both missing the point of introducing those "substitutes" (like "dungeons -> fractals" and "raids -> strikes"). The point seems to be an attempt to improve the content, but apparently it's either not reasonably possible to do with the old content or it's much easier to create a new iteration (fractals/strikes) than to implement the changes/improvements to the old content.

Edited April 25 by Sobx.1758

[Yerlock.4678]

11 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Ok, am I reading this wrong or what was this about?

And you didn't clarify on the first half of the post: How are fractals/raids supposed to work in ow? How is wvw supposed to work in ow when everyone can freely turn it on and off any time they want? For now I don't see how any of these are supposed to be beneficial at all.

You can either have more open world bosses that act as raid bosses and fractal type missions, or dedicate one mode to a sort of “dungeon” experience and not make any more dungeon/raid modes after said mode.

as to your second question I answered that.

13 minutes ago, gmmg.9210 said:

As to the wvw thing you could either have timers or restrictions barring people from flipping it on or off as many times as they like so they can’t easily escape combat once turned on, or have other servers which are wvw friendly where wvw mechanics are implemented. Basically their version of open world PvP conquest.

 

Edited April 25 by gmmg.9210

[Yerlock.4678]

4 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

I think you're both missing the point of introducing those "substitutes" (like "dungeons -> fractals" and "raids -> strikes"). The point seems to be an attempt to improve the content, but apparently it's either not reasonably possible to do with the old content or it's much easier to create a new iteration (fractals/strikes) than to implement the changes/improvements to the old content.

What I’m referring to here is a future guild wars game. We know their working on a guild wars 3 of some kind but I’m just saying whatever that game is I hope it doesn’t do what this game does and decides to limit the amount of instances content in terms of the number of modes. For this game it’s too late to go back I’d agree.

[Yerlock.4678]

On 4/18/2024 at 3:46 PM, Gehenna.3625 said:

Huh? They made multiple games before GW2? I'm only aware of one, GW1 that is. Which other ones are there then? I'm genuinely not aware of any others Anet made.

Two games. Games cuz it’s plural 

[Sobx.1758]

32 minutes ago, gmmg.9210 said:

You can either have more open world bosses that act as raid bosses and fractal type missions, or dedicate one mode to a sort of “dungeon” experience and not make any more dungeon/raid modes after said mode.

The question was: how would those encounters work in open world? I think they wouldn't. They'd be a zerged semi-afk "content" like current open world bosses are, which don't have much to do with raids/strikes/fractals. "dedicate one mode" is a bad idea, because those modes don't do the same thing. They can decide on "fractals over dungeons" or "strikes over raids" because those are targetting similar experiences, but that's also exactly what they are currently doing. You're basically advocating for them to cut content types while hoping what they cut isn't what you like? I think that's a bad idea.

32 minutes ago, gmmg.9210 said:

as to your second question I answered that.

Ok, you added it in when I was already responding, so it wasn't there for me at the time. 

32 minutes ago, gmmg.9210 said:

As to the wvw thing you could either have timers or restrictions barring people from flipping it on or off as many times as they like so they can’t easily escape combat once turned on, or have other servers which are wvw friendly where wvw mechanics are implemented. Basically their version of open world PvP conquest.

So it looks like you don't have a specific idea on this, it's not even some wishful thinking about "what it could be in the perfect world", but instead it's just saying whatever and then expecting them to somehow come up with something to fulfill the request which (as far as I can see with what you just wrote above) isn't even specific enough to understand what it's supposed to achieve in the game. Well, I asked the questions I did, because I was hoping you actually had the idea to push for. Doesn't seem like it though.

 

27 minutes ago, gmmg.9210 said:

What I’m referring to here is a future guild wars game

Yes, I do understand what thread I'm in -and so that's also what I'm talking about. But there seems to be lack of understanding that their goal was not really to "keep releasing new iterations of old content for the sake of it", it was "we want to improve this content, but it's either impossible or unreasonably hard to the point it's simply easier to make an entirely new iteration of it". It's a workaround to a problem, not something they came up with at the game's release and then just continued with their plan to "quickly mill through different content types/modes". Chances are if they make a new mmorpg, they'll go with the latest current iterations (so fractals/strikes) OR -most probably- make new, refreshed ones. At that point the actual request/hope here should be for them to make content (doesn't mean a single one by any means) which is easier to fix and manipulate (by devs) into something that could include new improvements, so there's no need to release new types of old modes in the first place.

Edited April 25 by Sobx.1758

[Yerlock.4678]

On 4/19/2024 at 2:40 AM, Cyninja.2954 said:

I marked the word which you yourself decided to use: hope.

Cynical? I gave you a down to earth current state of the industry. That's called being realistic. If I was being cynical, I would have counted down the dozens of failed recent and recent past MMORPGs. The direction the industry has moved overall and how many "this game XYZ will kill this other game YZX" we have had in the past, most often accompanied by "hope" and assumptions. The focus on mobile gaming and how it affects the market, etc.

I could have gone a full on doomer cycle if I wanted to be cynical. I chose to keep it light..

Yeah that’s the trend in the industry not really for anet. Sure it’s good to keep an eye out for those types of things but you need real proof in the pudding to make that sort of argument. Anet’s track record doesn’t give me any reason to think they’d try to duck us over with gw3. They know there’d be a mutiny considering previous games were not subscription based.

 

On 4/19/2024 at 2:40 AM, Cyninja.2954 said:

Negative? That's called realistic expectations. What, you think that after multiple hundreds of dollars of investment, NCSoft (or even Arenanet) are going to be happy with no increased return? Name a single industry where costs of development are not factored into the consumer price down the road. I'll wait.

Yeah game development is very expensive and risky but GW2 sold well and it seems NCsoft want that continual growth. GW3 offers that chance as it’s a well known ip. 

 

On 4/19/2024 at 2:40 AM, Cyninja.2954 said:

"Predatory" can also be a very subjective term given it has a huge component which is tied to personal spending willingness. The game doesn't have to be "predatory" to not align with this franchises player base. As far as Guild Wars being "predatory", I'll just refer you to all the issues which part of this player base takes offense with over the years: monetized bag space, build templates, transmutation charges, additional character slots, quality of life items, cost of expansions, content locked behind expansions, and the list goes on.

All of those can be acquired just by getting gold, which is something players can do by playing the game. Sure it takes a while to get the gold to convert but the game has plenty of content to offer which more than makes up for it. 🤷‍♂️ It’s not like without the quality of life additions the game is unbearable or unplayable/ un enjoyable. Far from it. It’s still fine. If anything a minor it’s a minor hindrance that can easily be ignored.

 

On 4/19/2024 at 2:40 AM, Cyninja.2954 said:

EA? You do realize there is a LARGE gap between EA and where we are at now with this product, right? No, NCSoft or Arenanet doesn't have to go the way of EA (or Activation, which have surpassed EA for years now). It be fully sufficient for them to merely move in the same direction NCSoft has on ANY of their other games (Throne and Liberty most recently) to completely screw this player base.

Now do I think they will go full on Throne of Liberty pay2win mode? I'd hope not. I do think that assuming GW3 will be "cheaper" or even similar in cost to GW2 is very delusional.

 

 Yeah I was using EA as a point of comparison… wasn’t implying you’re either as bad as EA or totally a non-greedy game company.

As to your other point, we’ll obviously have to wait and see and keep a watchful eye out. If they move in a greedier direction we gotta call them out on it. All I was saying there was I have my doubts about them getting too greedy considering their track record. I’d expect Guild wars 3 to basically cost the same lest they ruin their fan base. Blizzard showed how bad publicity can get when you get a popular pc game and decide to put a new version of it on phones.

On 4/19/2024 at 2:40 AM, Cyninja.2954 said:

Some of those points are contradictory to game development, some of them are strait up contradictory to what this studio has produced the last 20 years

Reasons why? Examples? Exactly where? I can say a lot of things too.

 

On 4/19/2024 at 2:40 AM, Cyninja.2954 said:

Yes, because running 2 competing products, one of which has just left a multi year long, multi million dollar expensive development cycle is a smart business decision.

Again, go and look how all of this has worked out for other MMORPGs which have had successor titles released to get an adequate feel for how this usually goes (Runescape to Runescape 2, Lineage to Lineage 2, Everquest to Everquest 2, FF11 to FF14, etc.).

It actually might be their best bet going forward considering they’re a public company and have investors to please to do two games at once. Grinding Gear games is doing something similar and people seem to really like the idea and be on board. 
The other games you mentioned failed because they put all their eggs in another basket and changed the formula too much. Path of Exile will still get updates and can be a safety net if PoE2 doesn’t work out as well as they intended or if there’s bumps in the road shortly after post launch. Gw2 can do something similar. Deliver GW3 as a new game while also still supporting gw2 for a while so that it gets new stuff and new updates as they transition more slowly into gw3 if it’s successful. It alleviates the transition from one mmo to another by bridging the gap between the two games. 

I’d hold off on the doomer rhetoric because who knows? Gw3 could be good after all and even if it was terrible they could still keep up support and update guild wars 2 even after gw3 is out. 
 

This approach allows for a smoother transition period and might be the best for everyone:)

[Yerlock.4678]

17 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

The question was: how would those encounters work in open world? I think they wouldn't. They'd be a zerged semi-afk "content" like current open world bosses are, which don't have much to do with raids/strikes/fractals. "dedicate one mode" is a bad idea, because those modes don't do the same thing. They can decide on "fractals over dungeons" or "strikes over raids" because those are targetting similar experiences, but that's also exactly what they are currently doing. You're basically advocating for them to cut content types while hoping what they cut isn't what you like? I think that's a bad idea.

I mean it’s not unimaginable for the devs to make a boss in the open world that’s extremely hard and requires cooperation. They kinda did this already when the  Dragons End boss first came out. The funny thing is I actually was interested in beating it at launch cuz it was so difficult I heard. But after the nerfs to it, it seemed just too easy for me to care lol, but that’s just me.

To your other point I admit there’s a level of trust you have to put in the devs to keep the good things from the instanced dungeon-type modes and leave out the bad. But assuming they did it right I would argue the pros would outweigh the cons. Perhaps just allowing dungeons to become upscaled into 10 man raids would kill 2 birds with one stone. You wouldn’t need to make an entire new area with new bosses/levels/features etc but could still put more new things in existing spaces to let it become a raid itself.

34 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

So it looks like you don't have a specific idea on this, it's not even some wishful thinking about "what it could be in the perfect world", but instead it's just saying whatever and then expecting them to somehow come up with something to fulfill the request which (as far as I can see with what you just wrote above) isn't even specific enough to understand what it's supposed to achieve in the game. Well, I asked the questions I did, because I was hoping you actually had the idea to push for. Doesn't seem like it though.

I can elaborate if you’d like:) In a wvw styled server there would be the world of Tyria with all its quests and story content etc, but there would also be wvw styled themed keeps/castles/towers/farms/villages/ that can be controlled and conquered by players roaming around. The mechanics of the wvw style game would exist in a similar way to how it does now, it would just co-exist with the pve related world of Tyria. Combining these two features could allow for some interesting things. For example, you could have pve related quests that when completed allow a small tower to be made for the faction of your choosing. Another idea would be allowing open world bosses to, when defeated, give the faction of the players who killed it a resource node or some sort of economy upgrade.

These sorts of combinations would allow the world of pve to join in camaraderie with the wvw players and allow their faction to have more “pride” and a sense of togetherness in the community they represent. It would also give wvw players more of an incentive to try pve content and vice versa.

 

Another option is to toggle off or on your open world wvw/pvp “tag”. If you don’t want to participate in wvw stuff, you can simply tag it off while still doing everything else that’s pve. To make sure this mechanic doesn’t get abused to gank other factions and players, you could implement a timer on it. So if you decide to go into pve only mode you have to wait 10-15 minutes until turning it on again. You could also not allow it to be turned off/on during combat, and it couldn’t be toggled off/on if enemy players are nearby or if you’re very close to an enemy structure/caravan or npc.

54 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Yes, I do understand what thread I'm in -and so that's also what I'm talking about. But there seems to be lack of understanding that their goal was not really to "keep releasing new iterations of old content for the sake of it", it was "we want to improve this content, but it's either impossible or unreasonably hard to the point it's simply easier to make an entirely new iteration of it". It's a workaround to a problem, not something they came up with at the game's release and then just continued with their plan to "quickly mill through different content types/modes". Chances are if they make a new mmorpg, they'll go with the latest current iterations (so fractals/strikes) OR -most probably- make new, refreshed ones. At that point the actual request/hope here should be for them to make content (doesn't mean a single one by any means) which is easier to fix and manipulate (by devs) into something that could include new improvements, so there's no need to release new types of old modes in the first place.

Whatever they do I just hope they learn the lessons of the last decade and don’t leave modes like wvw/pvp stranded for years with hardly any content. Or keep raiders waiting indefinitely for a new raid. Or promise alliances only to seemingly indefinitely work on it because I guess it’s only 1 intern working on the whole thing and he only works 2 days a week.

[Astralporing.1957]

3 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Ok, am I reading this wrong or what was this about?

And you didn't clarify on the first half of the post: How are fractals/raids supposed to work in ow? How is wvw supposed to work in ow when everyone can freely turn it on and off any time they want? For now I don't see how any of these are supposed to be beneficial at all.

Yes, you are obviously reading it wrong (or not reading at all), since you are asking questions about things that weren't in the post you responded to.

Hint: noone's saying that everything should be bundled into a single mode.

[Sobx.1758]

51 minutes ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Hint: noone's saying that everything should be bundled into a single mode.

Please read the thread before writing whatever.

Hint: the person I quoted made another thread which got merged into this one. The first post of his thread is here:
https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/144948-thoughts-about-gw3-merged/page/35/#comment-2109703
This is the relevant fragment about "putting those in ow" (so... "a single mode totally nobody talked about" you're mentioning in your post):

On 4/22/2024 at 10:52 PM, gmmg.9210 said:

Hot take but I think even raids and fractals, and even wvw should be all put into the open world map for the next game, with no loading zones between maps. 
(...) and let people opt in or out of wvw combat if they want to participate.

 

So you didn't understand what you're responding to, missed what OP (of the thread merged into this one, so gmmg) actually wrote and yet still decided to jump in with no understanding of what you're commenting on. Please provide better "hints" next time, this one was as wrong as it possibly could be.

Edited April 26 by Sobx.1758

[Cyninja.2954]

13 hours ago, gmmg.9210 said:

Yeah that’s the trend in the industry not really for anet. Sure it’s good to keep an eye out for those types of things but you need real proof in the pudding to make that sort of argument. Anet’s track record doesn’t give me any reason to think they’d try to duck us over with gw3. They know there’d be a mutiny considering previous games were not subscription based.

Their track record of what, 2 games?

Their track record of monetization development in GW2?

You being oblivious does not erase the already present monetization increases which have both taken place between the first and second title, as well as within GW2s lifespan. 

EDIT: and just to reinvigorate your memory: we went from character slots, transmutation charges, rez orbs, bag slots (initial bag slot cap was 8, so 4 more. Now it's 14, most recently increased with SotO)  and booster on release to:

- bank slots (first added Feb 2013) of 8, to by now 17

- massive amounts of cosmetic items of differing design

- booster packs of differing design (Starter Pack, Weekly Pack, Living World Pack, etc.)

- way point unlocks and character boosts

- build and equipment templates (and similar to bag slots, increasing amount)

- glider skins, mount skins, boat skins. Most of which are gem store only

- free on login living world content, to now mini epxansions

- and more (just open the gem store and look at the divers selection of items which are on sale)

and a lot of designs which encourage or promote spending money on the game. Less than other games and this game remains one of the cheapest MMORPGs in the market, but it HAS developed and increased monetization (and monetization practices) since launch. Is that the track record your are referring to?

13 hours ago, gmmg.9210 said:

Yeah game development is very expensive and risky but GW2 sold well and it seems NCsoft want that continual growth. GW3 offers that chance as it’s a well known ip. 

GW2 sold well. How long ago was the launch?

Side questions: if GW2 was doing "so well", why is a GW3 being developed?

13 hours ago, gmmg.9210 said:

All of those can be acquired just by getting gold, which is something players can do by playing the game. Sure it takes a while to get the gold to convert but the game has plenty of content to offer which more than makes up for it. 🤷‍♂️ It’s not like without the quality of life additions the game is unbearable or unplayable/ un enjoyable. Far from it. It’s still fine. If anything a minor it’s a minor hindrance that can easily be ignored.

Fun fact: no they can't (besides the minor amount of gems acquired via achievement milestones).

You ignoring that those gems are being purchased by another player than the one acquiring the item from the gem store does not negate that fact.

Gems in this game are generated via purchase of those gems with real money, always.

Once again an issue where you seem unclear on HOW money is being generated for the studio or how ingame systems obfuscate (even if beneficial to some players, aka shuffling the purchase to wealthier players) how they promote the generation of revenue (in this case gem sales).

13 hours ago, gmmg.9210 said:

As to your other point, we’ll obviously have to wait and see and keep a watchful eye out. If they move in a greedier direction we gotta call them out on it. All I was saying there was I have my doubts about them getting too greedy considering their track record. I’d expect Guild wars 3 to basically cost the same lest they ruin their fan base. Blizzard showed how bad publicity can get when you get a popular pc game and decide to put a new version of it on phones.

They did didn't they? Oh yeah they are also making a ton more $ per player than before.

Staying with the same game type: the WoW of today generates a TON more money per player than the WoW of old. 

Once again, there is a huge difference between Blizzard and Arenanet or NCSoft and Activision, and that gap can and will be bridged. I've already mentioned how Areannets owning company has done so in other titles.

You expecting something based on wishful thinking or assumptions which ignore financial realities is on you.

13 hours ago, gmmg.9210 said:

Reasons why? Examples? Exactly where? I can say a lot of things too.

I figured I'd keep it short as well as some of the issues where already mentioned in this post and have to do with how the current game content is being released, and not expecting a change in that direction.

As to saying a lot: you are, most of it lacking substance or grounding in current day reality. The gem comment being your latest example of lacking understanding.

Edited April 26 by Cyninja.2954

[Izzy.2951]

5 hours ago, gmmg.9210 said:

Hallelujah someone agrees. You can combine the best of those modes into one and cut a bunch of dev time needed so you could just make much more content for that mode and other modes also.

Like what are you talking about? they have commited to just one mode of 5/10 instanced group content that is Strikes and fractals. Raids were abandonned in 2019 and dungeons in 2013. I think your out of the loop.

And btw for your other comment, if pvp, wvw, raids etc didnt existed ever in gw2. This game would be probably dead already cos you wouldnt have had those pvp/raid players.

Edited April 26 by Izzy.2951

[Izzy.2951]

On 4/24/2024 at 3:40 PM, Ashantara.8731 said:

I believe what they were trying to say is a general observation: for a game that has so little resources left to it, the current amount of construction sites (a.k.a. game modes and other areas that are being worked on) is just too many to deliver proper content for any of them.

The only thing they are commited to is Open world, story, strikes and fractals. And they have gone down in quality like hell since Gyala Delve.

PvP, Raids, Dungeons, Races, Guild Mission, Festivals and so on are abandonned. Even WvW is abandonned they just puted some numbers up and down and they are just "doing" world restructuring that is just a matchmaking change, wvw is the same it was 10 years ago.

Edited April 26 by Izzy.2951

[Astralporing.1957]

7 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Please read the thread before writing whatever.

Hint: the person I quoted made another thread which got merged into this one. The first post of his thread is here:
https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/144948-thoughts-about-gw3-merged/page/35/#comment-2109703
This is the relevant fragment about "putting those in ow" (so... "a single mode totally nobody talked about" you're mentioning in your post):

 

So you didn't understand what you're responding to, missed what OP (of the thread merged into this one, so gmmg) actually wrote and yet still decided to jump in with no understanding of what you're commenting on. Please provide better "hints" next time, this one was as wrong as it possibly could be.

Then perhaps you should have been responding to that post. Instead you were responding to one that did not mention any of that. Notice, that the points raised by the post you quoted were completely valid, but you decided to completely ignore them and respond to something else completely.

[Linken.6345]

11 minutes ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Then perhaps you should have been responding to that post. Instead you were responding to one that did not mention any of that. Notice, that the points raised by the post you quoted were completely valid, but you decided to completely ignore them and respond to something else completely.

It is called a comment chain the forum is just bad at showing more then the latest post you comment on.

So thats why its best to read the whole thread to see when those two started to talk bettwen themselfs.

[Astralporing.1957]

2 hours ago, Linken.6345 said:

It is called a comment chain the forum is just bad at showing more then the latest post you comment on.

So thats why its best to read the whole thread to see when those two started to talk bettwen themselfs.

Stil, the key issue of that thread was "too many modes, which results in most of them not getting enough support, so let's reduce those for GW3". And it got completely ignored over a tangential extreme example.

The real answer to "how we'd do X mode inside Y mode" would be "we wouldn't", there would just be less (sub)modes to go around, and less divisions inside those modes.

Let's be honest, again, the main issue is very real. We have instanced PvE modes split over 5-man, 10-man and 50-man. Each of those is split again (5 man into dungeons, fractals and DRMs, 10 man into raids and strikes). There's no unified lobbies for all of that either. And it's not just having fractals, strikes, raids and dungeons separated into  different lobbies, but also strikes being separated into 3 different lobbies as well - and for no good reason at all.

Ignoring all of this just to debate about "how to put fractals in OW" is trying to sidestep the very core of the issue at hand and concentrate at arguments that are at best tangential to that. Tangential, but easier to argue against, i guess.

[kharmin.7683]

10 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Side questions: if GW2 was doing "so well", why is a GW3 being developed?

Horse and carriage worked well.  Why were cars and trains developed?

[Cyninja.2954]

1 hour ago, kharmin.7683 said:

Horse and carriage worked well.  Why were cars and trains developed?

Your assumption fails on the simple premise that horse and carriage were far inferior to cars.

We have a market where new MMORPGs are often inferior to established games. That's without getting into difference of software versus hardware upgrade ability.

Your comparison thus falls very flat. Thanks for playing.

[Sobx.1758]

5 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Then perhaps you should have been responding to that post. Instead you were responding to one that did not mention any of that. Notice, that the points raised by the post you quoted were completely valid, but you decided to completely ignore them and respond to something else completely.

I did, before. This was an ongoing conversation, you not understanding what a comment chain is -or not even caring because you're too preoccupied with writing your extremely irrelevant "hints" in hopes you'll manage to correct someone- is on you. I'm literally questioning the vague ideas he comes up with, meanwhile you literally don't understand who wrote what, but still eagerly jump in for some reason. You're wrong, get over it.

Which points? The ones edited in while I was already responding (which was also mentioned in subsequent posts btw)? The ones that we are talking about in other posts?  Or the ones that are based on what I was already questioning?

Edited April 26 by Sobx.1758

[kharmin.7683]

12 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Your assumption fails on the simple premise that horse and carriage were far inferior to cars.

We have a market where new MMORPGs are often inferior to established games. That's without getting into difference of software versus hardware upgrade ability.

Your comparison thus falls very flat. Thanks for playing.

So, you think a GW3 would not be superior to GW2?