Group content required for story completion

[Sigmoid.7082]

@Mewcifer.5198 said:

@Sigmoid.7082 said:

@Mewcifer.5198 said:

@Sigmoid.7082 said:

@Mewcifer.5198 said:Wow, I see a lot of strawmanning in the responses to me. So here we go:Every single MMO still has content that can be done solo, the amount of soloable content can vary but GW2 has always leaned heavily into being more solo friendly and allowing people to pick and choose when to interact with others and who they want to interact with (such as not having things like group queues that toss you into a group of randoms until recently with the public strike missions)I do not want anet to stop making group content.I play group content in GW2 all the time.Story has just been traditionally a solo or party-optional part of the game, and I enjoyed it this way as it allowed me to take in the story and lore at my own pace without the distraction of other players and potential trolls.I do not always have friends available to play with and pugs are notorious for being bad to the point that its almost worse to have them around than to be solo.The mission needed for this story is tons of fun and I enjoy playing it, but I still feel it should not have been required to advance the story in my story journal.

So this boils down to where the progress of the content is recorded: in your story journal?

Yes and no.The fact that it's in the story journal is a big part of it. But there is also the possibility that the information we get from this release will be directly tied into the story later, so that even if it wasn't in the story journal the game would still expect you to have done it in order to understand a major plot point. (A pitfall that gw2 had when it came to dungeons and how if you didn't do the storymode for them you were suddenly met with a group of people who hated each other getting along again and you aren't sure what happened to change that)

Why are you making this sound like something new?

I mean by and large instanced or group content has always been used to tell potentially related but not overall important part of any given story in the game. You don't really need to understand the whole story of the dungeons or raids to get the major plot points, let alone understand the story and it's direction.

If this wasn't in the story journal I feel very confident in saying this thread would not exist. It literally seems is the fact that it's in the story journal that is your problem.

You clearly did not read what I just said.

Clearly, I did. I just don't agree with your assertion.

The game has been using instanced content to tell this type of story for a very very long time so my question still stands: why are you making this out to be something new, a shift in philosophy, when by your own admission your major problem is where the progress is tracked, in the story journal.

The main story , which is completely solo, is set up in such a way that everything like this is auxiliary and you don't really need to do it.

[Thornwolf.9721]

@Mewcifer.5198 said:

@Thornwolf.9721 said:

@Mewcifer.5198 said:The latest story requires 5-10 man instanced content in order to complete it. Anet has not required group content for story since the original Zhaitan fight which they later changed to be soloable.

Making group content required for the story is a step backwards.I prefer my first playthrough of new story content to be done solo so that I don't have the distraction of another player. Now, not only do I need another player, but if my friends arent online and willing to do it with me I am stuck with randoms who are even more of a disruption to my enjoyment of lore and story.

I know anet wants to push players into trying out strikes but this is not the way to do it.A chapter in my story journal should not require group content.

Its a step forward, Reinforce people to join guilds and play an MMORPG together. For too long guild wars 2 has tried to be both a single player game, and a multiplayer and I believe it was to get people to try visions of the past. Im not against it, it was and is a lot of fun and I've enjoyed it quite a lot more so than I initially thought I would as its got a lot of lore and feels good to play.

If you dislike this wait until the woodland cascades come next, its said to be a pve variant of WvW so I imagine its gonna require TONS of group content to actually work and get you to your story. I like this direction~

Historically a game company making a sizable change to the philosophy of their games and how they are played does not work out well for them.

Guild wars 2 has done that before with raids, and it did it again with expansions.

Single-player games parading around as MMO's never survive. Its high time they embrace what the game is, rather than try to make it something that it isn't to appease people who want to truly play a single player game. What is it the community always says when someone complains or asks for something "Don't like it dont play"? Or is it "Then go play something else". I have no sympathy this is a good move as it gets people to try the content, and its not the first time they've tied the story behind something and they continued to do it to this day.

Season 2 it was specific events, which required groups most of the time.HoT And Season 3 it tied it behind masteries, and hearts as well as contribution to the overall zone meta.PoF and S4 was much the same, heck dragon-fall had you get tangled into events which sometimes could block you from your goal.Icebrood saga prologue and the first two episodes had it locked behind events as well

This is not new, its simply another thing they are using to extend your playtime. But this time its trying to get you to play the game and make some friends, maybe even get to know some people and be part of a community. MMO's are designed like that by nature and its not our fault that they went against that for so long which honestly is probably why guild wars 2 has been a relative failure after its initial launch. Other games you can form memories and build relationships, its part of the game where as here its 100% built so you can be anti-social.

If I had it my way guilds would be required for more than they are, and would mean something. Seems we might actually be heading that way~

[ugrakarma.9416]

the real problem will come later(months or years?) if the map become more empty.

[Randulf.7614]

@Mewcifer.5198 said:

@Thornwolf.9721 said:

@Mewcifer.5198 said:The latest story requires 5-10 man instanced content in order to complete it. Anet has not required group content for story since the original Zhaitan fight which they later changed to be soloable.

Making group content required for the story is a step backwards.I prefer my first playthrough of new story content to be done solo so that I don't have the distraction of another player. Now, not only do I need another player, but if my friends arent online and willing to do it with me I am stuck with randoms who are even more of a disruption to my enjoyment of lore and story.

I know anet wants to push players into trying out strikes but this is not the way to do it.A chapter in my story journal should not require group content.

Its a step forward, Reinforce people to join guilds and play an MMORPG together. For too long guild wars 2 has tried to be both a single player game, and a multiplayer and I believe it was to get people to try visions of the past. Im not against it, it was and is a lot of fun and I've enjoyed it quite a lot more so than I initially thought I would as its got a lot of lore and feels good to play.

If you dislike this wait until the woodland cascades come next, its said to be a pve variant of WvW so I imagine its gonna require TONS of group content to actually work and get you to your story. I like this direction~

Historically a game company making a sizable change to the philosophy of their games and how they are played does not work out well for them.

This isn't a sizable change to their philosophy though. This is extra content geared to multiplayer and doesn't replace the solo experience they'd normally provide in any shape way or form. I can't see this causing any monumental issues for them if any issues at all. They've just taken what would be the equivalent of a meta chain and made it instanced because there isn't a map for it and it is in the past. group side stories have existed in other formats in the game for a while - invasions, unbound guardians, those Kralk portals. They've just done it a different way this time and one that seems to work really, really well.

Anet are strong believers in coop and multiplay. If anything they've steered away from that recently and that's not entirely worked out for them. They are getting back to reinforcing that mix again which they were much better at in the early years.

[Dante.1763]

@Thornwolf.9721 said:

If I had it my way guilds would be required for more than they are, and would mean something. Seems we might actually be heading that way~

You mean mega guilds right?. My small guild of 33 people of which a number only login to play story, and the rest dont play often would suffer, But i guess everyone should be part of a guild like VIP or TTS and its thousands of players, cause thats enjoyable? ick. Ive been part of huge guilds, i cant stand them, or the drama they have. I enjoy -knowing- all the people in my guilds, what they enjoy and what they dont.

As to the rest, i literally completed all of the rest of the game solo(Story -instances- only, and with the exception of the Grothmar strike, which i nearly didnt even attempt.) and that is how IMO it should be. im all for more 5-10 man content, but pushed into the main story, and also from what little i can actually play right now because of the bugs, this -is- more than a sidestory.

Raids, Dungeons and all the instanced content are yes used well to tell extra stories. But this one is a -huge- tie in to what happened in earlier missions.

@ugrakarma.9416 said:the real problem will come later(months or years?) if the map become more empty.

and this is 100% true.

Give it a few months or years if this game is still around and i can already see players asking for it to be nerfed because they cant find groups. Much like they did for the Zhaitan mission.

[zealex.9410]

@Dante.1763 said:

@"Mea.5491" said:

"Making group content required for the story is a step backwards."

Then you would cry in FFXIV, story is locked behind DOZENS of non-soloable dungeons and trials, lol. GW2 has a ridiculously LOW amount of FORCED group content for a massively

multiplayer

game. :tongue:

Maybe thats why we are playing this game and not that one.

I repeat. MMO =/= 10 man instanced dungeons. It means a bunch of players online together at the same time.

Maybe thats why ff14 had like 18mil registered acounts and gw2 is still stuck at 11mil?

[Thornwolf.9721]

@Dante.1763 said:

@Thornwolf.9721 said:

If I had it my way guilds would be required for more than they are, and would mean something. Seems we might actually be heading that way~

You mean mega guilds right?. My small guild of 33 people of which a number only login to play story, and the rest dont play often would suffer, But i guess everyone should be part of a guild like VIP or TTS and its thousands of players, cause thats enjoyable? ick. Ive been part of huge guilds, i cant stand them, or the drama they have. I enjoy -knowing- all the people in my guilds, what they enjoy and what they dont.

As to the rest, i literally completed all of the rest of the game solo(Story -instances- only, and with the exception of the Grothmar strike, which i nearly didnt even attempt.) and that is how IMO it should be. im all for more 5-10 man content, but pushed into the main story, and also from what little i can actually play right now because of the bugs, this -is- more than a sidestory.

Raids, Dungeons and all the instanced content are yes used well to tell extra stories. But this one is a -huge- tie in to what happened in earlier missions.

@"ugrakarma.9416" said:the real problem will come later(months or years?) if the map become more empty.

and this is 100% true.

Give it a few months or years if this game is still around and i can already see players asking for it to be nerfed because they cant find groups. Much like they did for the Zhaitan mission.

I am apart of a smaller guild than yours, the difference it sounds like is that we play together all the time when it suites us. You don't need some massive mega guild but the guilds should have meaning, should be tied to more content than it is. The game is called guild wars not "Solo adventures" so honestly your issues sound self imposed, I have been gaming with the people in my guild for well over fifteen years and have been in the guild since I was ten years old. We came from guild wars 1 and went to warhammer online, then came here. Believe you me if it keeps going the way its been going my guild is already looking at jumping ship, one of us hates guild wars 2 now due to how it feels so unreasonable and un-necessary to do anything in the game. Nothing matters, no progression and no point in doing content.

I don't feel its unreasonable to ask them to tie guilds to more, and do more with guilds. It should be one of the pieces to the end-game and it shouldn't be the sloppy seconds of the game. The game is changing and from the sounds of it the way its been since launch will no longer be how it is going forward, which might be a good thing as its not been well received. Its a "You get to end-game and then what? You got your gear, you're done WOOOHOOO" which is not how this game should handle itself.

[Vayne.8563]

@jinxykat.6519 said:I thought it was extremely fun (went with a public group) Honestly, players shouldn't be so turned off by group play, it IS an mmorpg, after all.

Players should like coke, not Pepsi.

There are probably as many solo people playing MMOs are people who like to group, which is part of hte problem. Telling them what they should and shouldn't like won't actually change what they do and don't like. I've been told to like vegetables my entire life, but it didn't take. Sad for me, but it's true.

Players don't choose what they like to play and many players have valid reasons to not want to group, including social phobias, home lives that don't allow them to devote unbroken time to content, or even physical disabilitie that could come on suddenly.

I care full time for a disabled person and sometimes I just have to walk away from the machine suddenly. Why would I want to be part of a group that's in part depending on me.

Obviously world bosses work for me, since no one is depending on me as part of a smaller group. Doing group content with my guild is okay because they understand my situation. But it's not a preference. It's not comfortable. And telling me to like it accomplishes nothing.

[Vayne.8563]

@Randulf.7614 said:

@Turkeyspit.3965 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Indeed since this is on par with dungeon stories

It's also similar to Nightmare Tower from LS1. Which people wanted back. And that WAS story content.

In fact LS1 was mostly group stuff - Battle for LA, Marionette, Nightmare Tower, Invasions, 2 dungeons, Tequatl

Still at work so haven't experienced it yet, but what about 3 months from now? 6 months from now? What will players new to the game or playing catchup do when everyone else is doing Eps 3 and they can't get enough peeps to finish the story?

It's all well and good to compare it to S1, but you never had that problem with S1 because the content gradually was removed from the game, so there was never a time when players would come along and struggle to get the groups needed to complete it.

This isn't directly main story though and it's easily completable with less and it's designed to be repeatable so it's not going to empty any time in the near future. This is the least likely instanced content to struggle to be completed so even those who want to experience it wont miss out due to spreading population

The idea is you can run around with friends in a squad or in a public group and still get stuff for it. It is for all intents and purposes, a quick access dungeon with a loose, contained story to give it purpose

And what about the not near future when other people are coming through who start up and are way behind?

[Vayne.8563]

@sevenDEADLY.5281 said:There are plenty of other NON multiplayer RPGs out there for people who demand every little thing in their video game experience be 100% without interaction with another human being. Feel free to try one of those games.

Not the point. The point is this is a significant change in the product. If I were reading a book and every chapter was in English and suddenly the next chapter was in a different language it would annoy me if I didn't speak that language. This is an exaageration of what's happening here.

Last month, for the first time, I didn't get hte meta achievement in a zone because I didn't want to do strike missions. I still don't want to do them. It would be different if the game started this way and I didn't like it. But they're changing the game on me and I don't like it. As such I'm going to complain about it, because I didn't ask for this change.

The story mode has ever been the purview of not just casual players but people who soloed content. Telling them they can't solo this content now, after all this time is simply a bad business decision. It will bite Anet in the ass.

I'm already playing less because of the last zone. Guess we'll see. But I think this is terrible for the game.

[Jilora.9524]

Hijacked thread alert. Stop taking everyone's comments personally

[Vayne.8563]

@"Mea.5491" said:"Making group content required for the story is a step backwards."

Then you would cry in FFXIV, story is locked behind DOZENS of non-soloable dungeons and trials, lol. GW2 has a ridiculously LOW amount of FORCED group content for a massively multiplayer game. :tongue:

Yep and some people chose this game for that reason. This is a change that's introduced badly. Anet is trying to tell me well if you want to keep moving forward this is the direction we're going. If it is, you'll be going without me and players like me.

It may not matter to you, but if there are enough of us, it will matter to the bottom line of the game. And that should matter to everyone playing.

[KryTiKaL.3125]

@Mewcifer.5198 said:

@Thornwolf.9721 said:

@Mewcifer.5198 said:The latest story requires 5-10 man instanced content in order to complete it. Anet has not required group content for story since the original Zhaitan fight which they later changed to be soloable.

Making group content required for the story is a step backwards.I prefer my first playthrough of new story content to be done solo so that I don't have the distraction of another player. Now, not only do I need another player, but if my friends arent online and willing to do it with me I am stuck with randoms who are even more of a disruption to my enjoyment of lore and story.

I know anet wants to push players into trying out strikes but this is not the way to do it.A chapter in my story journal should not require group content.

Its a step forward, Reinforce people to join guilds and play an MMORPG together. For too long guild wars 2 has tried to be both a single player game, and a multiplayer and I believe it was to get people to try visions of the past. Im not against it, it was and is a lot of fun and I've enjoyed it quite a lot more so than I initially thought I would as its got a lot of lore and feels good to play.

If you dislike this wait until the woodland cascades come next, its said to be a pve variant of WvW so I imagine its gonna require TONS of group content to actually work and get you to your story. I like this direction~

Historically a game company making a sizable change to the philosophy of their games and how they are played does not work out well for them.

Which ones "historically" has that happened with then? Because I can list off a few that have done that and they are doing better or just have continued to do great.

Destiny 2 changed much of its philosophy going forward after they broke away from Activision. I'd say they are doing better these days.Warframe has consistently changed over the years; changed game mechanics, changed rewards, they have also just recently changed enemy scaling as well as how the Status mechanics work.Path of Exile adds new things with each League release all the time that change the game quite a bit I'd say in regards to how rewards are earned and often times with the addition of new things to their skills.

I wouldn't call them pushing for more group content in the game as a "sizable change to philosophy", its a change for sure but when you're already on an MMORPG where multiplayer is implied in the name of the genre...its not really that huge of a deal. Especially when, with what we are talking about here, it gives you the option to just join a public lobby for it and it just groups people together for you. Barely have to do anything other than play through the content, which that content isn't terribly difficult.

[KryTiKaL.3125]

@Vayne.8563 said:

@"Mea.5491" said:

"Making group content required for the story is a step backwards."

Then you would cry in FFXIV, story is locked behind DOZENS of non-soloable dungeons and trials, lol. GW2 has a ridiculously LOW amount of FORCED group content for a massively

multiplayer

game. :tongue:

Yep and some people chose this game for that reason. This is a change that's introduced badly. Anet is trying to tell me well if you want to keep moving forward this is the direction we're going. If it is, you'll be going without me and players like me.

It may not matter to you, but if there are enough of us, it will matter to the bottom line of the game. And that should matter to everyone playing.

Sure it might "force" you to play with other players for that one mission but its taking care of the forming of a group for you if you just use the Public squad. The mission itself is fairly easy and doesn't require a ton of coordination beyond just ticking the boxes of the progressive objectives and then the boss fight at the end.

Technically the game "forces" you to play with other players whenever you do an event in the world or a World Boss. Its not much different than that, you're just pressing a button to do it.

[Lottie.5370]

The instance scales depending on the number of people inside it. I have done it with a group of 10 and a group of 2, and it was manageable (not at all difficult) both times.

Even for casual players it is doable solo, there are several waypoints inside if you die.

[Vayne.8563]

@KryTiKaL.3125 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@"Mea.5491" said:

"Making group content required for the story is a step backwards."

Then you would cry in FFXIV, story is locked behind DOZENS of non-soloable dungeons and trials, lol. GW2 has a ridiculously LOW amount of FORCED group content for a massively

multiplayer

game. :tongue:

Yep and some people chose this game for that reason. This is a change that's introduced badly. Anet is trying to tell me well if you want to keep moving forward this is the direction we're going. If it is, you'll be going without me and players like me.

It may not matter to you, but if there are enough of us, it will matter to the bottom line of the game. And that should matter to everyone playing.

Sure it might "force" you to play with other players for that one mission but its taking care of the forming of a group for you if you just use the Public squad. The mission itself is fairly easy and doesn't require a ton of coordination beyond just ticking the boxes of the progressive objectives and then the boss fight at the end.

Technically the game "forces" you to play with other players whenever you do an event in the world or a World Boss. Its not much different than that, you're just pressing a button to do it.

But it's not forcing me to group with other people. I can rock up to a meta event or world boss without grouping and often do.

[Jilora.9524]

@Vayne.8563 said:

@KryTiKaL.3125 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@"Mea.5491" said:

"Making group content required for the story is a step backwards."

Then you would cry in FFXIV, story is locked behind DOZENS of non-soloable dungeons and trials, lol. GW2 has a ridiculously LOW amount of FORCED group content for a massively

multiplayer

game. :tongue:

Yep and some people chose this game for that reason. This is a change that's introduced badly. Anet is trying to tell me well if you want to keep moving forward this is the direction we're going. If it is, you'll be going without me and players like me.

It may not matter to you, but if there are enough of us, it will matter to the bottom line of the game. And that should matter to everyone playing.

Sure it might "force" you to play with other players for that one mission but its taking care of the forming of a group for you if you just use the Public squad. The mission itself is fairly easy and doesn't require a ton of coordination beyond just ticking the boxes of the progressive objectives and then the boss fight at the end.

Technically the game "forces" you to play with other players whenever you do an event in the world or a World Boss. Its not much different than that, you're just pressing a button to do it.

But it's not forcing me to group with other people. I can rock up to a meta event or world boss without grouping and often do.

The person above just said they duo it easily which could mean it's soloable so try solo or with a friend who understands your unique circumstances

[Dante.1763]

@zealex.9410 said:

@Dante.1763 said:

@"Mea.5491" said:

"Making group content required for the story is a step backwards."

Then you would cry in FFXIV, story is locked behind DOZENS of non-soloable dungeons and trials, lol. GW2 has a ridiculously LOW amount of FORCED group content for a massively

multiplayer

game. :tongue:

Maybe thats why we are playing this game and not that one.

I repeat. MMO =/= 10 man instanced dungeons. It means a bunch of players online together at the same time.

Maybe thats why ff14 had like 18mil registered acounts and gw2 is still stuck at 11mil?

As this is off topic i wont be making a further comment, can take it to messages if you wish to discuss further.

@Thornwolf.9721 said:

@Dante.1763 said:

@Thornwolf.9721 said:

If I had it my way guilds would be required for more than they are, and would mean something. Seems we might actually be heading that way~

You mean mega guilds right?. My small guild of 33 people of which a number only login to play story, and the rest dont play often would suffer, But i guess everyone should be part of a guild like VIP or TTS and its thousands of players, cause thats enjoyable? ick. Ive been part of huge guilds, i cant stand them, or the drama they have. I enjoy -knowing- all the people in my guilds, what they enjoy and what they dont.

As to the rest, i literally completed all of the rest of the game solo(Story -instances- only, and with the exception of the Grothmar strike, which i nearly didnt even attempt.) and that is how IMO it should be. im all for more 5-10 man content, but pushed into the main story, and also from what little i can actually play right now because of the bugs, this -is- more than a sidestory.

Raids, Dungeons and all the instanced content are yes used well to tell extra stories. But this one is a -huge- tie in to what happened in earlier missions.

@"ugrakarma.9416" said:the real problem will come later(months or years?) if the map become more empty.

and this is 100% true.

Give it a few months or years if this game is still around and i can already see players asking for it to be nerfed because they cant find groups. Much like they did for the Zhaitan mission.

I am apart of a smaller guild than yours, the difference it sounds like is that we play together all the time when it suites us.

Mine dont play together unless we can, we all live in different time zones and we all have odd work hours. Our common purpose of doing RP is what brings us together, our characters are all linked -very- closely, do we enjoy playing together when possible? yes, but its not always possible.

You don't need some massive mega guild but the guilds should have meaning, should be tied to more content than it is. The game is called guild wars not "Solo adventures"

Its named after an in game event, you can argue "but back in pre release" All you want, but that reason changed when they changed the game and made PVE a huge portion of the game. and while guilds in GW had more purpose, after my guild in that game literally exploded because the two founders divorced, and split the group in half i no longer wanted to be part of a guild like that again.

so honestly your issues sound self imposed, I have been gaming with the people in my guild for well over fifteen years and have been in the guild since I was ten years old.

Thats nice, i wish my friends IRL played MMOS, but they dont most of them refuse to due to the grind.

We came from guild wars 1 and went to warhammer online, then came here.

See above.

Believe you me if it keeps going the way its been going my guild is already looking at jumping ship, one of us hates guild wars 2 now due to how it feels so unreasonable and un-necessary to do anything in the game. Nothing matters, no progression and no point in doing content.

GW1 didnt have progression either, after you obtained the titles, elite skins and elite armors there was no point there either, so that sounds like it would have happened regardless.

I don't feel its unreasonable to ask them to tie guilds to more, and do more with guilds. It should be one of the pieces to the end-game and it shouldn't be the sloppy seconds of the game. The game is changing and from the sounds of it the way its been since launch will no longer be how it is going forward, which might be a good thing as its not been well received.

I dont either, but they should keep it away from story, period. Add in Factions, add in GVG, add in MORE guild missions, leaderboards, alliance battles, hell add in stuff like the Jade Quarry, id love it all, but leave story as solo content.

Its a "You get to end-game and then what? You got your gear, you're done WOOOHOOO" which is not how this game should handle itself.

Literally is how the game was/is advertised. Obviously its keeping players like me who enjoy that concept around as 7 years later im still getting enjoyment out of the game, but its getting incredibly hard when every turn they force me into instances like they did in GW1. I -LOVE- seeing other players, but when im locked into an instance with 10 people and forced to use a certain build i get irritated.

@Lottie.5370 said:The instance scales depending on the number of people inside it. I have done it with a group of 10 and a group of 2, and it was manageable (not at all difficult) both times.

Even for casual players it is doable solo, there are several waypoints inside if you die.

this is welcomed news if true and if it is -that- should be mentioned at launch of the instance.

[Wubbbi.8172]

@kharmin.7683 said:

@jinxykat.6519 said:I thought it was extremely fun (went with a public group) Honestly, players shouldn't be so turned off by group play, it IS an mmorpg, after all.

But that's not the point. The point is forcing a play style that hasn't been required before.

No you are wrong and I disagree with you! Stop making these claims for all player and for everyone! I enjoyed playing with others, yes with strangers! It was a lot of fun and I thank ANet for this experience! I would love to see more like this. Please don't listen to the complainer who think that crying the loudest makes them right.I disagree with the whole complaint in this topic!I LOVE VISIONS OF THE PAST! <3

[Dante.1763]

@Wubbbi.8172 said:

@kharmin.7683 said:

@jinxykat.6519 said:I thought it was extremely fun (went with a public group) Honestly, players shouldn't be so turned off by group play, it IS an mmorpg, after all.

But that's not the point. The point is forcing a play style that hasn't been required before.

No you are wrong and I disagree with you! Stop making these claims for all player and for everyone! I enjoyed playing with others, yes with strangers! It was a lot of fun and I thank ANet for this experience! I would love to see more like this. Please don't listen to the complainer who think that crying the loudest makes them right.I LOVE VISIONS OF THE PAST! <3

The same goes for you.

[KryTiKaL.3125]

@Vayne.8563 said:

@KryTiKaL.3125 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@"Mea.5491" said:

"Making group content required for the story is a step backwards."

Then you would cry in FFXIV, story is locked behind DOZENS of non-soloable dungeons and trials, lol. GW2 has a ridiculously LOW amount of FORCED group content for a massively

multiplayer

game. :tongue:

Yep and some people chose this game for that reason. This is a change that's introduced badly. Anet is trying to tell me well if you want to keep moving forward this is the direction we're going. If it is, you'll be going without me and players like me.

It may not matter to you, but if there are enough of us, it will matter to the bottom line of the game. And that should matter to everyone playing.

Sure it might "force" you to play with other players for that one mission but its taking care of the forming of a group for you if you just use the Public squad. The mission itself is fairly easy and doesn't require a ton of coordination beyond just ticking the boxes of the progressive objectives and then the boss fight at the end.

Technically the game "forces" you to play with other players whenever you do an event in the world or a World Boss. Its not much different than that, you're just pressing a button to do it.

But it's not forcing me to group with other people. I can rock up to a meta event or world boss without grouping and often do.

It doesn't actually put you in a group with them, though, its more akin to a small public instance. So really not that different. You don't have to say anything to them, you don't have to interact much. Just pay attention to what is going on and you're fine. When I played through it I didn't say anything to anyone I was with and just watched for mechanics and listened to the NPC dialogue.

Whatever your circumstances might be in regards to this kind of thing I can understand that it can be difficult, I mean I suffer from anxiety so I get that being around or associating with other people can be a little rough just based on my own experiences. However you can just treat this like anything else in the game, specifically like open world. It isn't much different. Its fewer people involved but it requires just about as little communication as open world does. I understand its likely a little rough right now because its fresh and new and you weren't expecting it, but I'm sure you can get through it. It just depends on how you approach it so if you take a moment and just think of it like you're just rolling up to an event out in a zone then maybe that will make it easier.

[Jilora.9524]

Anet seems to have learned kinda. The strike missions in meta were forcing some into content they weren't comfortable with. This new strike seems to allow you to enter as 1 up to 10 as you wish and complete. They also added pure gold purchasing on the armor with the option of lucky drops from strikes or if you unlucky over time you can buy those lucky strike drops with crystals(a lot) but still. If you keep with the topics issue it is not an issue as it's solo/group optional content

[Randulf.7614]

@Wubbbi.8172 said:I LOVE VISIONS OF THE PAST! <3

Me too. I hope more are on the way - this would make a nice piece of semi-regular content every 2-3 episodes

@Dante.1763 said:but when im locked into an instance with 10 people and forced to use a certain build i get irritated.

Just for clarity in case you (or anyone else reading) isn't aware yet - you use your own build entirely and you don't anything meta or specific. It is open world level of play in terms of you choose to fight with. Even the follow on solo instance allows you the quick option between your build or Rylands skillset and I have to say that was great thinking by Anet.

[MattDu.7123]

post removed

[Vayne.8563]

@Jilora.9524 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@KryTiKaL.3125 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@"Mea.5491" said:

"Making group content required for the story is a step backwards."

Then you would cry in FFXIV, story is locked behind DOZENS of non-soloable dungeons and trials, lol. GW2 has a ridiculously LOW amount of FORCED group content for a massively

multiplayer

game. :tongue:

Yep and some people chose this game for that reason. This is a change that's introduced badly. Anet is trying to tell me well if you want to keep moving forward this is the direction we're going. If it is, you'll be going without me and players like me.

It may not matter to you, but if there are enough of us, it will matter to the bottom line of the game. And that should matter to everyone playing.

Sure it might "force" you to play with other players for that one mission but its taking care of the forming of a group for you if you just use the Public squad. The mission itself is fairly easy and doesn't require a ton of coordination beyond just ticking the boxes of the progressive objectives and then the boss fight at the end.

Technically the game "forces" you to play with other players whenever you do an event in the world or a World Boss. Its not much different than that, you're just pressing a button to do it.

But it's not forcing me to group with other people. I can rock up to a meta event or world boss without grouping and often do.

The person above just said they duo it easily which could mean it's soloable so try solo or with a friend who understands your unique circumstances

Yep I'm going to try it. You might be led to think I solo most of the time, but that's not the case. I just play with a few guldies most of the time.