Maybe stop adding variety to add new content for player, too much redundancy

[vivienkid.7241]

IMO, gw2 is a RPG first,  the design trying to make every class able to do healing and similar thing already break the RPG immersion, and weapon master again break the Elite spec lore. Now here comes spear.

Gw2 is an MMO already with plenty variety since the first launch which indeed is its' highlight. Adding more and more variety in the game makes it redundant and bloating, not to say it makes it harder to balance it. More pvx content instead of more weapon variety is needed to attract players. My humble opinion is to redesign class or weapon when needed to add fresh air instead bloating weapons or elite, it's already too much.

[Bladestrom.6425]

28 minutes ago, vivienkid.7241 said:

IMO, gw2 is a RPG first,  the design trying to make every class able to do healing and similar thing already break the RPG immersion, and weapon master again break the Elite spec lore. Now here comes spear.

Gw2 is an MMO already with plenty variety since the first launch which indeed is its' highlight. Adding more and more variety in the game makes it redundant and bloating, not to say it makes it harder to balance it. More pvx content instead of more weapon variety is needed to attract players. My humble opinion is to redesign class or weapon when needed to add fresh air instead bloating weapons or elite, it's already too much.

disagree, one of GW2 massive strengths is its build versatility and the hard gear power ceiling (balancing passes should be much quicker however) PVE in GW2 is also massive and is about to get even better with housing which is the joint premium feature for the next expansion.

Edited July 27 by Bladestrom.6425

[Gehenna.3625]

34 minutes ago, vivienkid.7241 said:

IMO, gw2 is a RPG first, 

imo GW2 is an MMO first, however, what is your definition of an RPG in this context? A lot of people have very different views on what an RPG actually is, hence my question.

[Parasite.5389]

1 hour ago, vivienkid.7241 said:

IMO, gw2 is a RPG first,  the design trying to make every class able to do healing and similar thing already break the RPG immersion, and weapon master again break the Elite spec lore. Now here comes spear.

Gw2 is an MMO already with plenty variety since the first launch which indeed is its' highlight. Adding more and more variety in the game makes it redundant and bloating, not to say it makes it harder to balance it. More pvx content instead of more weapon variety is needed to attract players. My humble opinion is to redesign class or weapon when needed to add fresh air instead bloating weapons or elite, it's already too much.

y'know, if you don't like the game, you can play something else

[Astralporing.1957]

2 hours ago, Bladestrom.6425 said:

disagree, one of GW2 massive strengths is its build versatility

It's one of GW2's greaterst strengths, but also one of its greatest failures. Versatility only works if the options to choose are somewhat equal in worth. Meanhwile, in GW2 90% of all gear/build options you can pick are complete trash. And i am very generous about that 90%.

It's that versatility that results in the 10x gap in dps between average and top. It's also the way too complex system behind that versatility that is responsible for most players being unable to bridge that gap on their own.

As for OP's arguments about "breaking RPG immersion" and "elite spec lore", those are complete bunk, of course. "RPG immersion" does not in any way require strict role separation. There's a ton of multiclass or classless RPGs out there that clearly shows that. If anything, it's that strict separation that is immersion breaking. Same with elite spec weapons, btw - why exactly your ability to retain knowledge of use of a single weapon not disappearing just because you decided to use a different approach (different espec) would be lore breaking i have no idea.

[Teknomancer.4895]

10 minutes ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

why exactly your ability to retain knowledge of use of a single weapon not disappearing just because you decided to use a different approach (different espec) would be lore breaking i have no idea.

Right? It's as if the weapon itself remembers the skill, and not your character. I don't think it should go back to GW1-style where the equipped weapon (which could be anything for any class) was mostly just an AA, and the skills had to be learned by the character. But I'm not sure where the middle ground is or should be between the two, tbh.

[vivienkid.7241]

4 hours ago, Parasite.5389 said:

y'know, if you don't like the game, you can play something else

You know, That's exactly what I'm about to do. No salty.  Just think Gw2 have a good base, nice animation and art style, so deserve to be better.

If you think player shouldn't complain or raise suggestions, what's the point of this forum? and why are you wandering in this forum, searching new builds, finding praise for the game?

 

Edited July 27 by vivienkid.7241
typo

[vivienkid.7241]

5 hours ago, Bladestrom.6425 said:

disagree, one of GW2 massive strengths is its build versatility and the hard gear power ceiling (balancing passes should be much quicker however) PVE in GW2 is also massive and is about to get even better with housing which is the joint premium feature for the next expansion.

I agree that build versatility is great and what I love in the game for so many years. But I just think it's too much burden for Anet to keep adding it, since it's really hard to balance them. Now the space for build versatility is huge already. No need to force them to add more. Instead refine the stuff we have and balance them.

[vivienkid.7241]

5 hours ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

imo GW2 is an MMO first, however, what is your definition of an RPG in this context? A lot of people have very different views on what an RPG actually is, hence my question.

That's true, everyone has their taste for RPG. I'm a mesmer main from the start, and like the definition of faking and illusion staff, and never though mesmer will do healing oneday(maybe illusion life style, just thinking wild). And I agree what you said, it's maybe just my narrow taste of RPG.

[Kozumi.5816]

5 hours ago, Bladestrom.6425 said:

build versatility

It doesn't really have any. It wasn't until EoD it joined WoW in having 3 playable specs per class.

The trait system is just an illusion of choice. Weapons are the real variety. There's actually weapon variety in builds now, so I think adding more weapons and updating old ones is better.

[willow.8209]

I think it's great that there is always something new to try.

But I agree that there are many options, yet only a few are "meta". To really be versatile they'd all need to work at a similar level. 

[Gop.8713]

I agree there are far too many build options and that results in balance being a hopeless task. I would much rather see limited options resulting in outcomes determined by player skill rather than buid v build as it is now. HOWEVER, I also realize that a lot of players love theorycrafting and the new build options are the primary draw of new releases for those players. The game needs to appeal to a broad variety of players, not just me. And since balance is already hopelessly broken and there is zero chance of them ever dialing it back, I don't have any real problem with them adding more to the bloat, if it keeps more players engaged . . .

[Mhina.1827]

16 hours ago, Parasite.5389 said:

y'know, if you don't like the game, you can play something else

Nah this is a weird take. Typically, if someone is on a game's forum, they're probably passionate enough about the game to want a sustained relationship with it. The forums are literally designed to host discussions about ways to potentially maintain or enrich the product's usability and enjoyment. You don't have to agree with every idea, but the notion that we should just tell people with an opposing viewpoint to go play something else is...just lame to be honest. 

[Obnoxa.6702]

17 hours ago, Parasite.5389 said:

y'know, if you don't like the game, you can play something else

The same could be said about visiting the forum. /shrug


As to the topic at hand:  I'm very much on the fence in this subject - a solid argument can be made that the value of versatility is questionable considering only a handful of builds really shine (read: meta) and the rest are relatively subpar.
However, even in admitting that, I love the idea of not being pigeon-holed into sitting around LFG like in MMOs of old because I could only fill one specific role, and the continued implementation of class/build versatility is a pretty big selling feature of the game.
As for pve content, I don't even know where that's coming from - I'm a pretty old gamer, and GW2 is the first mmo I've ever played that still had active content from it's launch; there's so much content and more is continuously added; absolutely zero things wrong with the amount of or pace of additional content.

[Bladestrom.6425]

If you read through this thread, the issue is not wide build versatility which is desirable, it's balancing, so therefore the  answer to the problem is not to take away build versatility, its to resolve the balancing issues.  In GW2 we have a huge advantage in terms of build volatility with the hard gear ceiling and also fixed pvp builds and split of skills between PVP/PVe stats etc, so the main problem that remains is that the balancing cycles are far too slow to cope with  emergent issues in a timely manner.  If Anet balanced weekly, i.e small iterative increment tweaks and constant refinement (Agile/lean/kanban etc) then the problem would naturally resolve over time, and that's what the community should be pushing for if anything. 

Unfortunately many don't recognise that trying to roll up changes in bigger releases is a false economy over gearing up for fast iterative releases, but its well understood in software development.  Interestingly the Anet chat on a new PVP map shows they do understand iterative development.

Edited July 28 by Bladestrom.6425

[Astralporing.1957]

1 hour ago, Bladestrom.6425 said:

If you read through this thread, the issue is not wide build versatility which is desirable, it's balancing, so therefore the  answer to the problem is not to take away build versatility, its to resolve the balancing issues. 

Those issues, as far as versatility goes, cannot be fully solved in the current system. Sure, you can try to balance the meta builds, but no matter how hard you try, the 99% of possible builds will still be trash. Due to how stats compound each other, most stat sets (and stat set hybrid combinations) are a very bad idea. Due to how traits interact, most trait combinations just do not make sense. If we add to that weapons that usually go along only with certain subsets of builds, and skills, fo which, again, many are just not useful for most builds (and cannot be made to be generally useful either), we end up in a situation that cannot be fixed by just a balance pass, and would require a masive systems overhaul.

Do not misunderstand me, by the way - versatility is good. It's just too much of it starts to become a problem and drags the whole idea down.

Edited July 28 by Astralporing.1957

[Ashen.2907]

5 hours ago, Bladestrom.6425 said:

the main problem that remains is that the balancing cycles are far too slow to cope with  emergent issues in a timely manner.  If Anet balanced weekly, i.e small iterative increment tweaks and constant refinement (Agile/lean/kanban etc) then the problem would naturally resolve over time,

I think that there would need to be significant overhaul to the what and how of balancing in order for increasing frequency to be an improvement. 

[Kozumi.5816]

On 7/27/2024 at 6:25 AM, Parasite.5389 said:

y'know, if you don't like the game, you can play something else

Wildstar players said the exact same thing.

You can no longer play that game - it shut down due to lack of players!

[Bladestrom.6425]

57 minutes ago, Ashen.2907 said:

I think that there would need to be significant overhaul to the what and how of balancing in order for increasing frequency to be an improvement. 

Yeah, and its reasonable to assume that Anet would increase the balance cycles if they could, which I guess means many of the operands are baked into the code rather than being extracted into config/ data items.

[Tinker.6924]

Only someone who doesn't understand what an RPG truly is would consider GW2 a "real" RPG let alone claim that GW2 was an RPG "first". 

What in game support does GW2 have for RPG play?  Does it have dedicated servers for RPG players?  No.  What about dedicated RPG zones?  No. Does it allow in game direct trading between players? No.  Does it provide meaningful game choices that impact how friendly or hostile NPC's react to you later?  No.  GW2 has a rudimentary emote system (so does every game out there) and in LFG there are 2 RPG-choices.  That's it.  That's at best lip-service for the RPG hopefuls.

BG3 is probably the ultimate PC RPG, you can avoid combat and gain loot through persuasion and intimidation. How you treat your party NPC's changes their dialogue and appearances later.  SWTOR is a few steps below BG3 by presenting moral choices that raise and lower your Dark and Light Force and this can impact your appearance and your future interactions with NPC's.  WoW has dedicated servers for RPG players with special rules to support RPG-friendly play and you can be penalized in game for violating those rules.   WoW also has a reputation system that can make some NPC's attack you on sight or be friendly with you.

GW2 is an MMO game first, second, and last.  Any real RPG "friendliness" is created by players without real system support.

 

Edited July 28 by Tinker.6924

[Gehenna.3625]

5 hours ago, Tinker.6924 said:

Only someone who doesn't understand what an RPG truly is would consider GW2 a "real" RPG let alone claim that GW2 was an RPG "first"

This is silly. Many people have different definitions of what makes an RPG truly an RPG. You seem to have your own definition which seems to revolve around RP; but for someone who's a bit older like myself, for example, I would consider TTRPGs the true form of an RPG. Others might argue that LARP is the true form of an RPG which is also a fair definition.  I would argue that there's no such thing as a "true" form of an RPG and it all depends on your personal viewpoint

[Dean Calaway.9718]

On 7/27/2024 at 10:06 AM, vivienkid.7241 said:

Gw2 is an MMO already with plenty variety since the first launch which indeed is its' highlight.

So what's the problem? If anything GW2 is only bring more true to itself now.

Or you wanna go back to early days of raids with strict comps?

[kharmin.7683]

I'd prefer the earlier days when raids weren't a thing. 

[Noidea Incognito.9607]

I would say their 1st game GW1 is more an RPG then GW2; which puts way more emphasis on the MMO/Social convention aspect. That is why it called an MMO-ARPG.

(GW1 gave full control of how you wanted to build your main character and team of NPC side-kicks and all content could be done 100% without the need for other players)

GW2's priority is the MMO part, though they do a good job fleshing out the RPG part too. Adding more options(like the spear) in GW2 is probably for the best to extend its longevity. 

They are in a good spot really but forget not what the gaming industry is like ; they need to keep innovate/ reinvent the wheel to keep things interesting. 

The phrase "Less is more" does absolutely not cut it with MMOARPG's such as GW2.

 

You can play how you wanna play in GW2.... really you can; for 95%.

In Open-world/wvw/pvp, etc(wich is about 95% of the total game) it doesn't matter much cause people cant tell you what to do/play; just do what you want.

But in specific 5/10 man content(5%) its a little different; you have to put aside your "own ways" temporarily and cooperate to "fit in" to complete that content successfully.

 

Its just how it is. 

No Raids, CM's, etc? That's not an option. Those are needed to fill a certain void/craving within a demography that's part of the total gw2 community.

In a perfect scenario; whatever you play doesn't matter and all spec are equally powerful and thus there are no restrictions applied by others on how you want to play; since every spec is equal in strength they then have no reason to "cancel" your way of playing anymore.

But perfect scenario's are more in the realm of fairy tails o7

 

 

 

Edited July 29 by Noidea Incognito.9607

[kiroho.4738]

On 7/27/2024 at 11:06 AM, vivienkid.7241 said:

IMO, gw2 is a RPG first,  the design trying to make every class able to do healing and similar thing already break the RPG immersion

So the game doesn't fit your idea of an RPG, okay. It's your opinion, but nothing bad objectively.

 

On 7/27/2024 at 11:06 AM, vivienkid.7241 said:

and weapon master again break the Elite spec lore.

Would you mind to elaborate that?

With Elite specs a class learns a new way to use their magic/abilities based on the region. The class learns new abilities and how to use a new weapon.

With the weapon mastery a class learns how to use the weapon of each elite spec, but not the abilities. This completely makes sense with the Wizards Court in the background, who are watching all of Tyria from afar gatherin informations. It's plausible that someone (especially the commander) could be able to learn how to use a weapon unique to a certain region using that knowledge.
Further with the second part the player does exactly that in Nayos. The player gathers information about weapon practices and based on that learn to use a new weapon.

I don't see any lore problems here, so please elaborate.

 

On 7/27/2024 at 11:06 AM, vivienkid.7241 said:

Now here comes spear.

Again, elaborate please.
As far as we know Janthir Kodan use Spear for a long time. The player learns from them how to use it (on land).
It's pretty similar to how the player learns an elite spec and elite weapon lore wise, except that it's not distiguished by classes. Kodan wield spear, we learn from them how to do so.

 

On 7/27/2024 at 11:06 AM, vivienkid.7241 said:

Gw2 is an MMO already with plenty variety since the first launch which indeed is its' highlight. Adding more and more variety in the game makes it redundant and bloating, not to say it makes it harder to balance it. More pvx content instead of more weapon variety is needed to attract players. My humble opinion is to redesign class or weapon when needed to add fresh air instead bloating weapons or elite, it's already too much.

But... new weapons are pvx content...

I would even say new weapons / especs are one of the main reason people buy an expansion.

But yeah, I really don't see how you distinguish between Espec / new weapon and pvx content.